Cooper

Ask Johnny
Why do you knock pick up if it works!?
JANUARY 6, 2015 BY ADMIN LEAVE A COMMENT
Stop knocking pick up!!!
ght? It s developed guys.

Pick up is garnering results for guys, so it works ri

This kind of thinking is known as Post Hoc Fallacy and is a form of self-decepti
on. Also known as post hoc ergo propter hoc (in latin: after this therefore beca
use of this ) is a fallacy based upon the mistaken notion that simply because even
t B happens after event A, event A was the cause of event B. Post hoc thinking
is the basis for many erroneous beliefs and superstitions.

You see many events follow sequential patterns without being causally related.
Here are some:

You drink whiskey and honey and your dry throat clears up
You have hiccups so you stand on your head for 30 minutes and your hiccups go aw
ay
You wear your lucky pants and your football team wins
you stop a girl on the street by jumping in front of her, and 10 mins later you
get her number
YOU DO PICKUP AND YOU GET LAID
Sequences like this are merely correlations and not to be mistaken with a pre-re
quisite of causality. There is not Sufficient information to establish that the
prior event caused the later one. To establish the probability of a causal conne
ction between two events, controls must be established to reduce and eliminate a
ll other variables such as chance or some unknown causal factor. Unless under
scrutinous laboratory environments in real life this is almost impossible, as li
fe is far too dynamic and chaotic.

Lets imagine pick up didn t exist, and we re in Victorian England, and I told you to
pick pocket 100 people on the street. And lets say up to that point you didnt r
eally leave the house or talk to women. By pickpocketing 100 people, you would l
earn about body language, timing, awareness, social dynamics, touch, getting out
side your comfort zone, overcoming nerves and so on. As it is the only avenue f
or you to take action, you would argue its case by saying hey John why knock pic
kpocketing it s developed me! BUT are we saying pickpocketing is the answer? To
agree to that would be akin to madness. In this example, if it helped you with
women, it s merely a correlation not a causation. Similiarly pick up is currently
the only avenue, for taking masculine action with women and so is obviously mis
taken for the causality of an eventual sexual encounter. Although pick-pocketin
g is not as severe, pick up is an illusion cloaked in hope and is equally flawed

.

But it works, because I approached, I got laid and normally i wouldn t have spoken
to the girl.

This is the unfortunate predicament the community are in right now. They cannot
see the wood from the trees. Fish don t know they are in water because they are s
o emersed in it. They have no perspctive outside of water therefore know no diff
erent.

Because pick up is the first and (currently) only avenue for men to engage with
women with a context for intimacy, they believe pick up should be protected at a
ll costs. But they forget, pick up does not own the bloody trademark on going
over and talking to a woman, thats not exclusive to pick up you know!

We have confused seeing a girl we like and taking masculine, with pick up. Also
yes if you are someone that spends their days playing world of warcraft in your
mums basement eating Quavers, then of course doing pickup will be a marked improve
ment in your social development. Wanking off to porn or approaching and disarmin
g 100 targets
a day? If I went up and happy slapped 100 grannies, i would learn
more about women and develop more socially than playing fifa all day long.
The problem is, pick up is the first generation of seduction that has been artic
ulated into a blueprint, that means that when we speak of talking to women, and
having a conversation and guiding it to something more intimate, this is immedia
tely assumed as pick up. But there belies the flaw in our thinking.
Trying to reach sexual freedom with women through pick up is like trying to find
enlightenment
through scientology.

---------------------------------Ask Johnny Is Social Heartistry for beginners?
JANUARY 2, 2015 BY ADMIN LEAVE A COMMENT
Is Social Heartistry for beginners?
Welcome to the first

Ask Johnny ,

Here s the question:
Is this a paradigm which is only applicable to certain people who have reached th
e point where they can go beyond pickup? Would you teach this to someone who is
a complete newbie to pickup or just tell them to get more experience and come ba
ck?
I m assuming that this is in regard to the paradigm of seducing and meeting women
without pickup, which I have coined Social Heartistry .

Here s my answer:
Yes, even a complete newbie can and should learn this! Not so that I can get pai
d as a coach, but so that they can achieve the success with women they desire wi
th less stress, ups and downs, but instead cruise happily and peacefully with au
tonomy.
The reason why is simple: If you ve schooled yourself in pickup, blasted through y
our approach anxiety , overcame your fear of rejection and toiled through set after
set, you ll find it harder to attract women without using pickup, and have more t
rouble being a naturally attractive man.
The best students I have had are the ones that know next to nothing about pick u
p.
Why? Because when I m coaching a guy who s gone through the major schools of pickup
and has had some success, I ll bring him to the point he s not using any pickup tech
niques at all and simply being naturally seductive, but it s removing years of ing
rained mindsets and beliefs that is the hardest part.
I can take a complete newbie and say: Feel into your autonomy (intrinsic purpose
in this moment aside from women) now imagine opening yourself out wide to the w
orld and allowing that brunette right there to be welcomed into YOU. Observe an
d use your emotional awareness to comment on her
perhaps she s walking more elegan
tly than a ballet dancer, or whatever intuitively comes up, talk to her, allow i
t flow organically then invite her to carry the conversation on over a coffee!
H
e walks up, feeling into the moment, and feeling into her rather than analytical
ly scripting out lines
And the magic happens!
A newbie can either take a long path to seductive success (covering himself up w
ith
PUA techniques, then transcending it to being a natural), or just skip that hard
journey and become a natural if they follow my guidance.
This paradigm is geared towards seduction but also relates to a way of being and
is applicable to practically any guy who wants to step up with women and with l
ife in general.
What s this new paradigm? Well the paradigm I have created, in my opinion subvert
s pick up on its head.
I run an online course that goes through every
aspect of this paradigm, but here s the cheatsheet into the core principles:
Giving(intentionally) instead of taking: realizing that girls desire guys to com
e up and seduce them, and to do it from a place of co-creation instead of pickup
acquisition.
Autonomy instead of need: Fulfilling oneself in life first, whilst taking action
with women, and whenever an interaction doesn t go where you want it to go, you s
tep back into your identity as a man on his path. Like a droplet of water return
ing to it s ocean of purpose.
Playing instead of working: Pick up is set up as a work frame, where every act
ion has a dualistic outcome of win or lose attached to it. Actions are either r
ewarded upon completion (result), or fail (rejection) Instead, surrendering to t

he childlike playfulness inside ourselves and seeing the creative potential intr
insically in every moment (always winning)
FILED UNDER: UNCATEGORIZED
-------------------------High Energy Vs Low Energy + How To Adjust Talking To Different Girls!
JANUARY 5, 2015 BY ADMIN LEAVE A COMMENT

One thing that I m constantly asked about by students is the debate on high and lo
w energy.
Is it better to be a crazy jumping monkey who s a maniac on the dancefloor??? Or i
s it better to be the chilled out, almost meditative James Bond kind of guy??? T
he answer is:
It s about being a master of BOTH high and low energy! Being able to move yoursel
f across a spectrum of energy to match the context.
If you re just a chilled out low energy guy, it ll be really tough to seduce a girl
on the dancefloor.
If you re a hyped-up high energy guy, it ll be really tough to talk slowly and quiet
ly to a girl reading a book in the park!
Now I ve got the reputation of being a big high-energy dancefloor guy.
But the reality is that I am a master of energy and can adjust my energy to any
environment.
For instance, look at the video! I m in a real low-energy state, sitting on a park
bench talking about some seduction theory.
But if you see my videos where I m on the streets, running around with my umbrella
, or my bar and club videos where i m physically leading, and being what s considere
d to be a high energy guy.
So it all depends on the context of the situation.
Don t just come in there guns blazing into a chill jazz bar, chatting up the neare
st chick with a sexual furore.
And, don t just come into a nightclub all smooth and chilled, and expect the girl
losing it on the dancefloor to stop dancing and say hi to you!
Instead, feel the energy of the location harmonise with it. Be the chameleon.
Is the girl in a state where saying a soft hello is more than enough to grab her a
ttention, or is she in a state where the only way to grab her attention is to pl
ayfully dance along with her, and swing her in for a salsa kiss?!
Now, onto how to adjust your energy to different girls .

However, before we get into all of this:
Keep in mind that this is not a technique of deception, where you put on a false
persona in order to pickup a women. It s very easy to look at what I m saying throug
h the pick up goggles and take the symptoms of someone that is being emotional i
ntelligent and then extract the stand alone techniques. Then plug it into an ac
quisition frame. That s NOT what i m saying.
Be careful not to treat intuitively adapting and harmonising to different people i
n different environments as a form of social and emotional resonance versus using
mirroring or pacing & leading as arbitrary techniques in order to give the impress
ion we have rapport so as to control or deceive.
I m not going into parks going, Where s my target, where s my target in a cold sweat and
then cold approaching a girl reading a book and using my low-energy opener and mirr
oring gambit . Instead, this is me tuning in with her energetically so we are in
resonance and I am in-the-moment and present with that. And no not because that
helps me transition into phase 2? or helps me reach the hook point !
When you go out and start inviting girls into your life, you re gonna encounter so
me different girl types.
You ll have feisty girls who always have a sarcastic, witty comeback and something
to say.
I love girls like that, I ll ramp up the flirtatious challenges, and we get into c
heeky banter quite quickly. Pushing the boundaries a bit more and giving each o
ther some shit!
You ll have shy girl-next-door types, who are quiet and soft-spoken and prefer bar
s over loud
nightclubs. In fact they may not even like bars!.
With girls like that, i m tuning into her and resonating. It s almost like i m finding
her energy inside me this is the best way to describe it. I ll find myself adju
sting my body posture to be less high status & dominant so it s less intimidating
and instead I ll be leaning in a bit, and speaking softer, listening and holding s
pace more.
In fact, a lot of this i m not even conscious of. I sometimes have to watch back
videos of myself and observe what I say and do on a technical level, because at
the time i m so out of my head and tuned in.
Those are two different girls (high-energy and low-energy) that you ll tend to enc
ounter. If I challenge the higher energy, more confident girl, I m likely to find
myself saying FUCK OFF NO WAY
and it s totally fine as that s the level of rapport we
have. Whereas if i m challenging the more gentle girl, I ll find myself challengin
g with really?
are you sure . And no not as a technique or routine but as the words
that emmerge from being in genuine rapport.
Although you cannot make sweeping generalisations, i m going to anyway! So with t
hat in mind, I notice cultural differences in the personalities of certain natio
nalities. I m not talking about every person being exactly the same but there tend
s to be a correlation of personality traits through the mean average. Italians
for instance are very extrovert and tactile. They are passionate and express t

hemselves more. With italian girls I can allow my cheeky playful side to come o
ut more and I can mess around with her almost straight away. I can stand a litt
le closer, being very playful, sexual and physical and they can relate to that s
ort of swagger.
With a shy Korean girl for instance, I d give more personal space, talk slowly, no
t be so upfront with the physicality and slowly guide things until she becomes l
ess shy and more open to the co-creation of intimacy.
However, this doesn t mean that you stick to what she gives you on the first impre
ssion.
If after I say hello, the shy Korean girl starts challenging me, giving me some
tension to push back onto, I ll ramp things up to where she is, and meet her on th
at.
If after saying hello, the crazy dance chick slows down, stops prancing around a
nd just starts talking, I ll match her on that.
Take note: There is no blanket, one-size-fits-all technique or method that will gu
arantee you to seduce girls. Any coach or company teaching you one way of doing
something is teaching snakeoil.
Every environment is unique, every girl is unique in her energy level, her cultu
re, her likes and dislikes, her sexuality, her past history, her makeup, her lau
gh (you get the point)
In short there s no one method of seduction that will ever work, (sorry about that!)
as you yourself are a unique being, and the combination of the both of you tog
ether will always be a unique mix everytime.
So when I see all the London automatons around Leicester Square, running around
and jumping infront of every girl on every corner of the street (despite the uni
queness of that situation), dropping the same opening line and running through t
he same script I have to cringe.
This type of attitude and mindset comes out from a place of WORK, ACQUISITION an
d TAKING.
The reason why you want a blanket method is because you re viewing seduction as WO
RK not PLAY, and you want to cut the corners and minimize the time you spend sed
ucing the girl to just stick it in and get your rocks off. So it s deferred grati
fication where you re not enjoying yourself until you reap the reward of getting l
aid.
It is this inextricable intention of pickup that is so toxic
For me, I go out and I m not DOING seduction I am BEING seductive. Part of the be
ing is that I m not fussed whether a girl responds to my invitations or not, because
I m seeing seduction as PLAY- as the joyful dance of life. And with play it s momen
t by moment gratification. Fulfilment in each second. How can I be rejected if I
achieved my primary goal of play and have won the game already ?
If a girl doesn t respond to me physically dancing with her and turns to dance wit
h her friends, I m not rejected nor do I lose as I m having my own party, and I don t NE
ED her to validate me.
I m autonomous within myself, and I can participate 100% in a seduction yet can s
till be without an attachment to an outcome of sex.

That doesn t mean I m not playfully persistent either and give up!
If she plays off my attempt to co-create with her, I ll invite her again!?? The wa
y I look at it is that my invitations to a seduction come from a paradigm of GIV
ING, and that there might be something else that s causing her to say no.
Maybe she s got friends with her, and she wants to appear like she s the most valuabl
e chick in da club yo in front of them!?? Either way, I continue with my intrinsi
nc fufilment, and continue to extend out my invitations to girls!?? I don t see th
e process as something to go through to get to and that I ve got to control and have
a step-by-step plan for every possible scenario that happens. In other words a
warzone I must navigate my way through. (hence why I don t use the pua military
words like infield or targets , sets , approach )
I m leading as a man, I m making moves, escalating the seduction, but I m viewing it a
s surrendering to the seduction and to the energy of her and the environment, i
nstead of controlling her or it. As I said in a Saturday Sarge talk:
Be the sailor that rides the seas not controls the sea!
I m giving her my intent. She may say no, she may say yes, but I m autonomous and se
lf-fulfilled no matter what happens. That s why I can be spontaneous and not need
to have a blanket, one-size-fits-all method with the ladies.
Alright gents, that s enough for now.
Be the chameleon!
Johnny
-------------------------------Unplugging from the Social Matrix
JUNE 8, 2014 BY ADMIN LEAVE A COMMENT
In Shaun of the Dead, this funny opening scene plays on the fine line between zo
mbie behaviour and normal human behaviour, notably with early scenes of supermar
ket cashiers checking items through the till & guys waiting at a bus stop aimles
sly looking into the distance in a brain dead fashion.

We laugh at sequences like this but the ironic thing is we ALL act this way when
we go about our daily lives, in fact we spend most of our day running on Ant Aut
opilot with nothing very human required of us
Stop. Go. Walk here. Drive there. All action basically for survival. All communic
ation simply to keep this ant colony buzzing along in an efficient, polite manne
r. Here s your change. Paper or plastic?
Credit or debit?
You want ketchup with that?
The following sequence from Waking Life demonstrates the powerful effect of step
ping outside the social matrix and snapping someone else out of it revealing REA
L human behaviour.

Plugging out the Social Matrix

When we go out and want to chat to the beautiful girl at the bar, the feeling is
we need to get ourselves into a positive mood, lubricate our social muscle so t

o speak. Most people have a drink sometimes three, as a sort of dutch courage or
way to lose their inhibitions. This act is a way of somehow flicking a switch t
o go from ordinarily flat to fun sociable guy. This is not how it works.
If a guy says something funny once, people say He just said something funny . If th
at same guy says something funny three times, people say He IS funny. In the same
vein we shouldnt adopt a charismatic, positive mood when we have to, it is somet
hign we develop habitually so it becomes us. In terms of Game (even though I don t
like this phrase), it is something you ARE not something you HAVE.
Turning every Transaction into an Interaction
We don t need to chase after every girl we bump past. A really great starting poin
t is turning every Transaction into an Interaction. So think about every time yo
u are in a situation where you are buying a coffee, cinema ticket, pint of Lager
and so on. It is very easy to ask for what you want, give the money, say thanks
and walk off. The other person deals with this 1000x a day. If you find yoursel
f doing this, you need to ask Am I acting in a human way or on Ant Autopilot . Here s
a variation
(noticing name badge) Hey Valentina! Italian right?! Are you having a nice day? C
an I have [insert item]
You will notice this simple human touch, pops them out of the zombie like state,
and suddenly there is this beautiful moment where you have both transcended the
normal social etiquette and are interacting as humans. As a bonus, you will oft
en you get given free coffees. (I barely pay for my coffees now!)
Random acts of Kindness
Another
s a day
t could
coffee.
ou see.

really great exercise to do every day is to do 10 random acts of kindnes
to strangers. There are plenty of examples on this video. Be creative. I
be as small as a compliment or as big as taking a homeless person for a
Most importantly, it is not performed on just the first beautiful girl y

When you start gradually adding this behaviour to your repetoire, it becomes lik
e an elastic band, it stretches and stretches until eventually SNAP
we are no lo
nger pretending to be the person we want to be, we are that person. Then when we
are out in a bar later on, we don t have to turn the switch on, it is just an ext
ension of how we are.
----------------The Ayahuasca Crucifixtion
DECEMBER 8, 2013 BY ADMIN LEAVE A COMMENT
It s day 3 and the militant rhythm of clinking glass wakes me up. I look at my wa
tch and it s 5-fucking-30-am. We are being woken up to have our morning cup of Ajo
Sacha which must be drunk before sunrise. It s like watery garlic soup and isn t a
ctually too bad. It s meant to cleanse the toxins in the blood which apparently is
the reason I puff out like Nutty Professor when I get bitten by mossies. I stu
mble out the wooden tree-hut where we sleep, neck the cup in one, then fling mys
elf back onto my mosquito netted mattress and have two more hours of grumpy slum
ber.
We are on a diet for the purpose of the

Aya

working most effectively. No salt, no

sugar, no oils, no chili, oh and no wanking
ous!

apparently the aya spirit gets jeal

The first 2 days have been tough So far we have been eating nothing but white rice
and bananas and only two cups a day at that, plus plantaine which by all accoun
ts should taste nice, but doesn t. (Looks like a big banana, tastes cross between
a french fry that has gone stale and cardboard.) Today we are treated to one fis
h and papaya fruit. It s our first protein hit of the retreat. There is complete s
ilence for an hour as the four of us carefully suck each microbe of flesh off th
e bones, as if it s nectar from the god s.
553880_10153400514420089_378857363_n
It s the day of the first ceremony. I have been gagging to get this party started.
I am told I will have the largest cup and also go first as it s my initiation . Oh s
hit.
It s 7:30pm and a single candlelight casts a warm glow on the wooden floor set up
with various shamanic nic-nacs and paraphernalia. I am invited up first to take
the drink. Everyone in the circle is in the lotus sitting position as if they re
yoga veterans. It s all a bit OTT for me but as I approach the shaman, I get caugh
t up in the reverent atmosphere and find myself bowing my head and thrusting the
round wooden cup aloft as if i m that monkey fella that announces baby Simba to t
he herd.
ayablog
Glugging the drink down, a fierce taste of kerosene and fermented diarrhoea fill
my mouth <shudder>. Each person takes their turn to go up. The shaman and Bern
adinho the native Peruvian medicine man, who lives in the jungle, start whistlin
g and singing shamanic songs to the group.
40 mins in and nothing is happening apart from I feel a bit queazy
I begin to wo
nder if it s all mumbo jumbo. Johno one of the other group members starts being si
ck into his bucket accompanied by demonic, middle-earth style grunts. I pull my
bucket into a decent yacking radius, just in case.
My lower back is hurting being cross-legged and I choose to lay down. I have bee
n tense and resistant but I am starting to calm down into the perfect state of s
urrender. I feel this vibrational loving hand hold the back of my head. It feels
as though it was giving me something I had missed out on in my life somehow, as
if when I was young the back of my head wasn t protected. I sob gently for 5 seco
nds until a cough in the room sobers me. I then feel this lattice energy field w
orking its way down over and through my head like slowly running a barcode over
me, decompressing through the frontal lobes, then deep into the R-Complex of my
brain where the image of a snake representing the spinal chord shows up in my im
agination.
Bernadinho comes over to me and he s shaking a leafy thing over my head whilst sin
ging a song. My hands and arms suddenly vibrate and go into acute pins and needl
es as if someone has pumped an electric current through me. I try and shake it o
ff wincing in pain. I have to lie down. I pass out. I fall into a trance
Despite finding myself in a lucid dream like state, I m able to centre my awarenes
s and I telepathically project an intention into the vast soup of dream-like con
sciousness around me.
What s my purpose?

(A ruddy good first question to ask I feel)

I get a profound sense that i m meant to assist people to move from a mental based

paradigm (low vibration, fear, anxiety) to heart based (high vibrational consci
ousness). I bask in the apotheosis of having a christ-like mission in life. So m
uch so that I start to feel superior and elite. Then in that very moment, the va
rious past shortfallings and frustrations in my life don t just present themselves
to me but are instantaeously manifested in that moment and projected back throu
gh my chronology as a kind of punishment for getting ahead of myself in the now,
therefore teaching me the virtue of humility. I go deeper and deeper into the t
rance
There s a TV series called Life on Mars where the lead
in a coma, he wakes up and finds himself in the 1970s
ith the chief inspector represents his battle with the
italised body. The moment he disposes of the inspector
no more.

has a car crash and ends up
and the conflict he has w
coma in his original hosp
is the moment his coma is

In the same way, I now see my human reality is really illusory
it had been dream
t forth as a metaphor for the situation in the now and having graduated through
that process, was now instantly absorbed and dissolved into the new reality as i
f it had never happened, like a droplet of water falling back into a whirlpool.
How infinitesimally small and insignificant my life had been yet how completely
equal it was to everything else in this multi-dimensional vortex where all thoug
hts, imagination and realities exist as equal, collapsed into itself like a neve
r ending kaleidoscope image.
As I flop around on my mattress, It is like being strapped in on some freakish r
ollercoaster ride and there s no getting off. I am dying and being reborn at a rat
e of knots, metamorphosing over and over again. I feel absolutely desperate, I d
on t know whether i m upside down or inside out. I m alone with my insanity. My only c
ompanion is fear, fear that I will never come back. Time doesn t exist and I could
have been stuck like this for a thousand life times. Then again it could have b
een only a few minutes.
The candlelight in the room is blown out and it is now pitch black. I clamber ba
ck some awareness and I realise I need a sip of water from my bottle. In my into
xicated state, I pick up the sick bucket and lift it to my lips. As I do, I hear
coincidental laughter in the room. It triggers me to assess what I m doing and I
put it down. I don t know where the water is though, and at that precise moment, t
he shaman lights their mapacho cigar and walks across room. I trace the red bu
rning embers of the end of the cigar moving through the air like a tracking beam
and as they ash into the ashtray on the floor, I use this as a guidance system
and I reach down directly beneath the hovering red dot and my hand lands plum on
the bottle. I take a swig and as I try and put the lid back on. I can t. Then sud
denly I hear a click from someones lighter. Ah Listen to the click . I then click t
he bottle lid shut effortlessly. I pick up the sick bucket in my hands and need
to be sick, but i m just gagging. I suddenly hear someone hock up some phelgm, so
I try doing the same and I immediately puke. Astonishingly, it is as if the enti
re room are there solely to guide me through each task or movement i m making, gea
ring together like one big symphony of perfect synchronistic precision, like a D
onnie Darko film. Yet it s pitch black and its impossible that the others know wha
t i m doing.
My eyes are closed and I see a divine light in front of me, a narrow vertical be
am of iridescent purple and gold light,and I m gliding towards it along a razor s ed
ge threshold , surrounded by black emptiness either side. Am I entering into dea
th, heaven, hell or what? What is this light? As I get closer I have a sense tha
t this is the divine, containing infinite awareness. This is god. As I get near,
I see the temptations of sex and other low level bestial debauchery from deep w
ithin the pits of darkness, offered to me by a long connecting chord which is a
snake with an apple in it s mouth. It s as if the forbidden fruit of temptation is t
here to test me to see if my purpose waivers and lures me back into mortality. W

hilst this happens, the following words come to me as a felt experience:
Will you choose to carry your wisdom on selflessly?
I contemplate the seductive sensual pleasures. A disgruntled cough from across
the room bellows out at that exact moment.
Ok I choose YES I am the man for the job. The narrow beam of light opens and engu
lfs me into the everlasting light. It was as if I had experienced my own judgmen
t day and by making my decision to share my gift I had chosen to accept life, ac
cept god, as opposed to seeking the distracting temptations and therefore death.
I was in a new world.
Welcome to interdimensional reality calls out Shae who is now sat beside me. What!
but how did he ! The synchronisity is unfathomable.
It was as if I had died and he was welcoming me into this celestial heaven. He w
as no longer Shae but my guardian brother angel. His soft reassuring aussie voic
e was the embodiment of the exact voice I would want to hear if entering heaven
for the first time. It was uncanny. I feel like my human sense of self had disso
lved and I was in another dimension. I had passed over. Was I prepared to be in
this heaven and still help people. I said yes. Was I prepared to die for the res
t of humanity? Ah fuck ok.
It was as if this was a spiritual test to see how far I was prepared to go.
Everyone in room is now surrounding me. Why? Did my human self die. Is my human
body in a coma, having a heart attack, like in Life on Mars, which is allowing m
e to be in this alternative dimenson/heaven? I realise that my human self is mil
es from a hospital and if i was having a cardiac arrest I d be too far from help,
and so my death would be inevitable.
I look up and directly above me is a wooden cross in the roof
I m dying on the cross i m dying a sacrificial death i m Jesus 2.0!
IMG_3750
I know it s hard but just think what s happening here guardian angel Shae, says. (my c
urrent translation: look I know you don t want to die, but you re jesus christ
how co
ol is that )
Star Child, Star Child sings the shaman with teary eyes and a wimpering tone of as
tonishment in her voice.
I can feel a hand on my chest around my heart. Yup that s it I am dying, probably
a heart attack. Can I let go of my human self and passover. Or do I resist?
I can hear the sweet sound of a harp welcoming me into heaven, (which turns out
to be James playing on his flute ) combined with huffing n puffing as if everyone i
s sad yet overjoyed at being an integral part of this second-coming miracle unfo
lding.
In the narrative I was forming, the group, have lived their pre-destined lives,
prologued up to this exact symbolic moment in time and place to bare witness as
the sacred disciples of this holy death. They are the 5 guardians, the 5 key ele
ments brought together in this symbolic star of david perfection The Shaman as t
he divine feminine, James the watchman and protector, Shae the eternal brother,
Bernadinho the huntsman, and Johno the hidden love. Their lives and mine finally
made sense.

It s a holy of holy experiences.
As I lay down , my arms open up wide into the crucifix T-position. I am willing
to die in this monumental way, whilst my soul slipped into eternal awareness but w
hat about my mum and family I thought.
Suddenly, Madre
nish)

Madre

sings Bernadinho from across the room. (which means mum in Spa

I was dying a symbolic death on the cross which was above my head. The cross rep
resented centre point when everything returns back to complete balance just befo
re it ascends.
But I don t want to die. If I fight it, perhaps I can kick myself out of the heart
attack. As I struggle and sit up, the group are trying to hold me into this ce
lestial heaven and not let me go back to mortal human reality, whereas really th
ey are just relaxing me. They convince me to surrender I collapse back and my hea
d lands perfectly and perpendicularly on my pillow.
I remain still and allow myself to enter into the light, into god.
But what if I get bored with infinite wisdom and awareness.?
s are for.

I am shown what dream

I slowly immerse into the light and as I enter, I wake up instantly. I look roun
d the room and everyone is back doing their own thing.
Its the end of the ceremony, the end of my journey
thank Christ.

and It turns out i m not Jesus,

1374044_10152293888439377_1651941467_n
FILED UNDER: UNCATEGORIZED
LEAV
----------------------------------Imaginary time
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article includes a list of references, related reading or external links, b
ut its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please improve
this article by introducing more precise citations. (April 2009)
The relationship of real and imaginary time can be visualised as perpendicular a
xes of direction.
Imaginary time is a concept derived from quantum mechanics and is essential in c
onnecting quantum mechanics with statistical mechanics.
If we imagine "regular time" as a horizontal line running between "past" in one
direction and "future" in the other, then imaginary time would run perpendicular
to this line as the imaginary numbers run perpendicular to the real numbers in
the complex plane. Imaginary time is not imaginary in the sense that it is unrea
l or made-up it simply runs in a direction different from the type of time we ex
perience. In essence, imaginary time is a way of looking at the time dimension a
s if it were a dimension of space: you can move forward and backward along imagi
nary time, just like you can move right and left in space.
Contents [hide]

1 In quantum mechanics
2 In cosmology
3 See also
4 References
5 Further reading
6 External links
In quantum mechanics[edit]
Imaginary time \scriptstyle\tau is obtained from real time via a Wick rotation b
y \scriptstyle\pi/2 in the complex plane: \scriptstyle\tau\ =\ it. It can be sho
wn that at finite temperature T, the Green's functions are periodic in imaginary
time with a period of \scriptstyle 2\beta\ =\ 2/T. Therefore their Fourier tran
sforms contain only a discrete set of frequencies called Matsubara frequencies.
Another way to see the connection between statistical mechanics and quantum fiel
d theory is to consider the transition amplitude \scriptstyle\langle F\mid e^{-i
tH}\mid I\rangle between an initial state I and a final state F. H is the Hamil
tonian of that system. If we compare this with the partition function \scriptsty
le Z\ =\ \operatorname{Tr}\ e^{-\beta H} we see that to get the partition functi
on from the transition amplitudes we can replace \scriptstyle t\,=\,\beta/i, set
F = I = n and sum over n. This way we don't have to do twice the work by evalua
ting both the statistical properties and the transition amplitudes. Finally by u
sing a Wick rotation one can show that the Euclidean quantum field theory in (D
+ 1)-dimensional spacetime is nothing but quantum statistical mechanics in D-dim
ensional space.
In cosmology[edit]
One might think this means that imaginary numbers are just a mathematical game h
aving nothing to do with the real world. From the viewpoint of positivist philos
ophy, however, one cannot determine what is real. All one can do is find which m
athematical models describe the universe we live in. It turns out that a mathema
tical model involving imaginary time predicts not only effects we have already o
bserved but also effects we have not been able to measure yet nevertheless belie
ve in for other reasons. So what is real and what is imaginary? Is the distincti
on just in our minds?
Stephen Hawking
Imaginary time is also used in cosmology. It is used to describe models of the u
niverse in physical cosmology. Stephen Hawking popularized the concept of imagin
ary time in his book A Brief History of Time.
The concept is useful in cosmology because it can help smooth out gravitational
singularities in models of the universe (see Hartle Hawking state), where known ph
ysical laws do not apply. The Big Bang, for example, appears as a singularity in
"regular time." But, when visualized with imaginary time, the singularity is re
moved and the Big Bang functions like any other point in spacetime.
See also[edit]
---------------------------IMAGINARY TIME
Learn more about:
Stephen Hawking
Singularity

Related Topics:
No-Boundary Universe

Mathematicians are a clever lot. Just because a concept may not make sense at an
intuitive level doesn t mean that it can t be used to help understand nature. Take
imaginary numbers, for example. If you start with any real number and multiply it
by itself, you get a positive number. For instance, 2 times 2 equals 4 but so do
es -2 times -2. That means the square root of 4 equals both 2 and -2. But what w
ould the square root of -4 be? Mathematicians invented imaginary numbers to answ
er this question, defining the number i to equal the square root of -1 (making t
he square root of -4 equal to 2i).
Imaginary numbers can be used to help explain tunnelling, a quantum mecha
nical process in which, for instance, a particle can spontaneously pass through
a barrier. In trying to unify general relativity with quantum mechanics, physic
ists used a related idea in which they would measure time with imaginary numbers
instead of real numbers. By using this so-called imaginary time, physicists Ste
phen Hawking and Jim Hartle showed that the universe could have been born withou
t a singularity.
-------------------------------Stephen Hawking
The Beginning of Time
This lecture is the intellectual property of Professor S.W.Hawking. You may not
reproduce, edit, translate, distribute, publish or host this document in any way
with out the permission of Professor Hawking.
Note that there may be incorrect spellings, punctuation and/or grammar in this d
ocument. This is to allow correct pronunciation and timing by a speech synthesis
er.
Picture
In this lecture, I would like to discuss whether time itself has a beginning, an
d whether it will have an end. All the evidence seems to indicate, that the univ
erse has not existed forever, but that it had a beginning, about 15 billion year
s ago. This is probably the most remarkable discovery of modern cosmology. Yet i
t is now taken for granted. We are not yet certain whether the universe will hav
e an end. When I gave a lecture in Japan, I was asked not to mention the possibl
e re-collapse of the universe, because it might affect the stock market. However
, I can re-assure anyone who is nervous about their investments that it is a bit
early to sell: even if the universe does come to an end, it won't be for at lea
st twenty billion years. By that time, maybe the GATT trade agreement will have
come into effect.
The time scale of the universe is very long compared to that for human life. It
was therefore not surprising that until recently, the universe was thought to be
essentially static, and unchanging in time. On the other hand, it must have bee
n obvious, that society is evolving in culture and technology. This indicates th
at the present phase of human history can not have been going for more than a fe
w thousand years. Otherwise, we would be more advanced than we are. It was there
fore natural to believe that the human race, and maybe the whole universe, had a
beginning in the fairly recent past. However, many people were unhappy with the
idea that the universe had a beginning, because it seemed to imply the existenc
e of a supernatural being who created the universe. They preferred to believe th
at the universe, and the human race, had existed forever. Their explanation for

human progress was that there had been periodic floods, or other natural disaste
rs, which repeatedly set back the human race to a primitive state.
This argument about whether or not the universe had a beginning, persisted into
the 19th and 20th centuries. It was conducted mainly on the basis of theology an
d philosophy, with little consideration of observational evidence. This may have
been reasonable, given the notoriously unreliable character of cosmological obs
ervations, until fairly recently. The cosmologist, Sir Arthur Eddington, once sa
id, 'Don't worry if your theory doesn't agree with the observations, because the
y are probably wrong.' But if your theory disagrees with the Second Law of Therm
odynamics, it is in bad trouble. In fact, the theory that the universe has exist
ed forever is in serious difficulty with the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The S
econd Law, states that disorder always increases with time. Like the argument ab
out human progress, it indicates that there must have been a beginning. Otherwis
e, the universe would be in a state of complete disorder by now, and everything
would be at the same temperature. In an infinite and everlasting universe, every
line of sight would end on the surface of a star. This would mean that the nigh
t sky would have been as bright as the surface of the Sun. The only way of avoid
ing this problem would be if, for some reason, the stars did not shine before a
certain time.
In a universe that was essentially static, there would not have been any dynamic
al reason, why the stars should have suddenly turned on, at some time. Any such
"lighting up time" would have to be imposed by an intervention from outside the
universe. The situation was different, however, when it was realised that the un
iverse is not static, but expanding. Galaxies are moving steadily apart from eac
h other. This means that they were closer together in the past. One can plot the
separation of two galaxies, as a function of time. If there were no acceleratio
n due to gravity, the graph would be a straight line. It would go down to zero s
eparation, about twenty billion years ago. One would expect gravity, to cause th
e galaxies to accelerate towards each other. This will mean that the graph of th
e separation of two galaxies will bend downwards, below the straight line. So th
e time of zero separation, would have been less than twenty billion years ago.
At this time, the Big Bang, all the matter in the universe, would have been on t
op of itself. The density would have been infinite. It would have been what is c
alled, a singularity. At a singularity, all the laws of physics would have broke
n down. This means that the state of the universe, after the Big Bang, will not
depend on anything that may have happened before, because the deterministic laws
that govern the universe will break down in the Big Bang. The universe will evo
lve from the Big Bang, completely independently of what it was like before. Even
the amount of matter in the universe, can be different to what it was before th
e Big Bang, as the Law of Conservation of Matter, will break down at the Big Ban
g.
Since events before the Big Bang have no observational consequences, one may as
well cut them out of the theory, and say that time began at the Big Bang. Events
before the Big Bang, are simply not defined, because there's no way one could m
easure what happened at them. This kind of beginning to the universe, and of tim
e itself, is very different to the beginnings that had been considered earlier.
These had to be imposed on the universe by some external agency. There is no dyn
amical reason why the motion of bodies in the solar system can not be extrapolat
ed back in time, far beyond four thousand and four BC, the date for the creation
of the universe, according to the book of Genesis. Thus it would require the di
rect intervention of God, if the universe began at that date. By contrast, the B
ig Bang is a beginning that is required by the dynamical laws that govern the un
iverse. It is therefore intrinsic to the universe, and is not imposed on it from
outside.
Although the laws of science seemed to predict the universe had a beginning, the

y also seemed to predict that they could not determine how the universe would ha
ve begun. This was obviously very unsatisfactory. So there were a number of atte
mpts to get round the conclusion, that there was a singularity of infinite densi
ty in the past. One suggestion was to modify the law of gravity, so that it beca
me repulsive. This could lead to the graph of the separation between two galaxie
s, being a curve that approached zero, but didn't actually pass through it, at a
ny finite time in the past. Instead, the idea was that, as the galaxies moved ap
art, new galaxies were formed in between, from matter that was supposed to be co
ntinually created. This was the Steady State theory, proposed by Bondi, Gold, an
d Hoyle.
The Steady State theory, was what Karl Popper would call, a good scientific theo
ry: it made definite predictions, which could be tested by observation, and poss
ibly falsified. Unfortunately for the theory, they were falsified. The first tro
uble came with the Cambridge observations, of the number of radio sources of dif
ferent strengths. On average, one would expect that the fainter sources would al
so be the more distant. One would therefore expect them to be more numerous than
bright sources, which would tend to be near to us. However, the graph of the nu
mber of radio sources, against there strength, went up much more sharply at low
source strengths, than the Steady State theory predicted.
There were attempts to explain away this number count graph, by claiming that so
me of the faint radio sources, were within our own galaxy, and so did not tell u
s anything about cosmology. This argument didn't really stand up to further obse
rvations. But the final nail in the coffin of the Steady State theory came with
the discovery of the microwave background radiation, in 1965. This radiation is
the same in all directions. It has the spectrum of radiation in thermal equilibr
ium at a temperature of 2 point 7 degrees above the Absolute Zero of temperature
. There doesn't seem any way to explain this radiation in the Steady State theor
y.
Another attempt to avoid a beginning to time, was the suggestion, that maybe all
the galaxies didn't meet up at a single point in the past. Although on average,
the galaxies are moving apart from each other at a steady rate, they also have
small additional velocities, relative to the uniform expansion. These so-called
"peculiar velocities" of the galaxies, may be directed sideways to the main expa
nsion. It was argued, that as you plotted the position of the galaxies back in t
ime, the sideways peculiar velocities, would have meant that the galaxies wouldn
't have all met up. Instead, there could have been a previous contracting phase
of the universe, in which galaxies were moving towards each other. The sideways
velocities could have meant that the galaxies didn't collide, but rushed past ea
ch other, and then started to move apart. There wouldn't have been any singulari
ty of infinite density, or any breakdown of the laws of physics. Thus there woul
d be no necessity for the universe, and time itself, to have a beginning. Indeed
, one might suppose that the universe had oscillated, though that still wouldn't
solve the problem with the Second Law of Thermodynamics: one would expect that
the universe would become more disordered each oscillation. It is therefore diff
icult to see how the universe could have been oscillating for an infinite time.
This possibility, that the galaxies would have missed each other, was supported
by a paper by two Russians. They claimed that there would be no singularities in
a solution of the field equations of general relativity, which was fully genera
l, in the sense that it didn't have any exact symmetry. However, their claim was
proved wrong, by a number of theorems by Roger Penrose and myself. These showed
that general relativity predicted singularities, whenever more than a certain a
mount of mass was present in a region. The first theorems were designed to show
that time came to an end, inside a black hole, formed by the collapse of a star.
However, the expansion of the universe, is like the time reverse of the collaps
e of a star. I therefore want to show you, that observational evidence indicates
the universe contains sufficient matter, that it is like the time reverse of a

black hole, and so contains a singularity.
In order to discuss observations in cosmology, it is helpful to draw a diagram o
f events in space and time, with time going upward, and the space directions hor
izontal. To show this diagram properly, I would really need a four dimensional s
creen. However, because of government cuts, we could manage to provide only a tw
o dimensional screen. I shall therefore be able to show only one of the space di
rections.
As we look out at the universe, we are looking back in time, because light had t
o leave distant objects a long time ago, to reach us at the present time. This m
eans that the events we observe lie on what is called our past light cone. The p
oint of the cone is at our position, at the present time. As one goes back in ti
me on the diagram, the light cone spreads out to greater distances, and its area
increases. However, if there is sufficient matter on our past light cone, it wi
ll bend the rays of light towards each other. This will mean that, as one goes b
ack into the past, the area of our past light cone will reach a maximum, and the
n start to decrease. It is this focussing of our past light cone, by the gravita
tional effect of the matter in the universe, that is the signal that the univers
e is within its horizon, like the time reverse of a black hole. If one can deter
mine that there is enough matter in the universe, to focus our past light cone,
one can then apply the singularity theorems, to show that time must have a begin
ning.
How can we tell from the observations, whether there is enough matter on our pas
t light cone, to focus it? We observe a number of galaxies, but we can not measu
re directly how much matter they contain. Nor can we be sure that every line of
sight from us will pass through a galaxy. So I will give a different argument, t
o show that the universe contains enough matter, to focus our past light cone. T
he argument is based on the spectrum of the microwave background radiation. This
is characteristic of radiation that has been in thermal equilibrium, with matte
r at the same temperature. To achieve such an equilibrium, it is necessary for t
he radiation to be scattered by matter, many times. For example, the light that
we receive from the Sun has a characteristically thermal spectrum. This is not b
ecause the nuclear reactions, which go on in the centre of the Sun, produce radi
ation with a thermal spectrum. Rather, it is because the radiation has been scat
tered, by the matter in the Sun, many times on its way from the centre.
In the case of the universe, the fact that the microwave background has such an
exactly thermal spectrum indicates that it must have been scattered many times.
The universe must therefore contain enough matter, to make it opaque in every di
rection we look, because the microwave background is the same, in every directio
n we look. Moreover, this opacity must occur a long way away from us, because we
can see galaxies and quasars, at great distances. Thus there must be a lot of m
atter at a great distance from us. The greatest opacity over a broad wave band,
for a given density, comes from ionised hydrogen. It then follows that if there
is enough matter to make the universe opaque, there is also enough matter to foc
us our past light cone. One can then apply the theorem of Penrose and myself, to
show that time must have a beginning.
The focussing of our past light cone implied that time must have a beginning, if
the General Theory of relativity is correct. But one might raise the question,
of whether General Relativity really is correct. It certainly agrees with all th
e observational tests that have been carried out. However these test General Rel
ativity, only over fairly large distances. We know that General Relativity can n
ot be quite correct on very small distances, because it is a classical theory. T
his means, it doesn't take into account, the Uncertainty Principle of Quantum Me
chanics, which says that an object can not have both a well defined position, an
d a well defined speed: the more accurately one measures the position, the less
accurately one can measure the speed, and vice versa. Therefore, to understand t

he very high-density stage, when the universe was very small, one needs a quantu
m theory of gravity, which will combine General Relativity with the Uncertainty
Principle.
Many people hoped that quantum effects, would somehow smooth out the singularity
of infinite density, and allow the universe to bounce, and continue back to a p
revious contracting phase. This would be rather like the earlier idea of galaxie
s missing each other, but the bounce would occur at a much higher density. Howev
er, I think that this is not what happens: quantum effects do not remove the sin
gularity, and allow time to be continued back indefinitely. But it seems that qu
antum effects can remove the most objectionable feature, of singularities in cla
ssical General Relativity. This is that the classical theory, does not enable on
e to calculate what would come out of a singularity, because all the Laws of Phy
sics would break down there. This would mean that science could not predict how
the universe would have begun. Instead, one would have to appeal to an agency ou
tside the universe. This may be why many religious leaders, were ready to accept
the Big Bang, and the singularity theorems.
It seems that Quantum theory, on the other hand, can predict how the universe wi
ll begin. Quantum theory introduces a new idea, that of imaginary time. Imaginar
y time may sound like science fiction, and it has been brought into Doctor Who.
But nevertheless, it is a genuine scientific concept. One can picture it in the
following way. One can think of ordinary, real, time as a horizontal line. On th
e left, one has the past, and on the right, the future. But there's another kind
of time in the vertical direction. This is called imaginary time, because it is
not the kind of time we normally experience. But in a sense, it is just as real
, as what we call real time.
The three directions in space, and the one direction of imaginary time, make up
what is called a Euclidean space-time. I don't think anyone can picture a four d
imensional curve space. But it is not too difficult to visualise a two dimension
al surface, like a saddle, or the surface of a football.
In fact, James Hartle of the University of California Santa Barbara, and I have
proposed that space and imaginary time together, are indeed finite in extent, bu
t without boundary. They would be like the surface of the Earth, but with two mo
re dimensions. The surface of the Earth is finite in extent, but it doesn't have
any boundaries or edges. I have been round the world, and I didn't fall off.
If space and imaginary time are indeed like the surface of the Earth, there woul
dn't be any singularities in the imaginary time direction, at which the laws of
physics would break down. And there wouldn't be any boundaries, to the imaginary
time space-time, just as there aren't any boundaries to the surface of the Eart
h. This absence of boundaries means that the laws of physics would determine the
state of the universe uniquely, in imaginary time. But if one knows the state o
f the universe in imaginary time, one can calculate the state of the universe in
real time. One would still expect some sort of Big Bang singularity in real tim
e. So real time would still have a beginning. But one wouldn't have to appeal to
something outside the universe, to determine how the universe began. Instead, t
he way the universe started out at the Big Bang would be determined by the state
of the universe in imaginary time. Thus, the universe would be a completely sel
f-contained system. It would not be determined by anything outside the physical
universe, that we observe.
The no boundary condition, is the statement that the laws of physics hold everyw
here. Clearly, this is something that one would like to believe, but it is a hyp
othesis. One has to test it, by comparing the state of the universe that it woul
d predict, with observations of what the universe is actually like. If the obser
vations disagreed with the predictions of the no boundary hypothesis, we would h
ave to conclude the hypothesis was false. There would have to be something outsi

de the universe, to wind up the clockwork, and set the universe going. Of course
, even if the observations do agree with the predictions, that does not prove th
at the no boundary proposal is correct. But one's confidence in it would be incr
eased, particularly because there doesn't seem to be any other natural proposal,
for the quantum state of the universe.
The no boundary proposal, predicts that the universe would start at a single poi
nt, like the North Pole of the Earth. But this point wouldn't be a singularity,
like the Big Bang. Instead, it would be an ordinary point of space and time, lik
e the North Pole is an ordinary point on the Earth, or so I'm told. I have not b
een there myself.
According to the no boundary proposal, the universe would have expanded in a smo
oth way from a single point. As it expanded, it would have borrowed energy from
the gravitational field, to create matter. As any economist could have predicted
, the result of all that borrowing, was inflation. The universe expanded and bor
rowed at an ever-increasing rate. Fortunately, the debt of gravitational energy
will not have to be repaid until the end of the universe.
Eventually, the period of inflation would have ended, and the universe would hav
e settled down to a stage of more moderate growth or expansion. However, inflati
on would have left its mark on the universe. The universe would have been almost
completely smooth, but with very slight irregularities. These irregularities ar
e so little, only one part in a hundred thousand, that for years people looked f
or them in vain. But in 1992, the Cosmic Background Explorer satellite, COBE, fo
und these irregularities in the microwave background radiation. It was an histor
ic moment. We saw back to the origin of the universe. The form of the fluctuatio
ns in the microwave background agree closely with the predictions of the no boun
dary proposal. These very slight irregularities in the universe would have cause
d some regions to have expanded less fast than others. Eventually, they would ha
ve stopped expanding, and would have collapsed in on themselves, to form stars a
nd galaxies. Thus the no boundary proposal can explain all the rich and varied s
tructure, of the world we live in. What does the no boundary proposal predict fo
r the future of the universe? Because it requires that the universe is finite in
space, as well as in imaginary time, it implies that the universe will re-colla
pse eventually. However, it will not re-collapse for a very long time, much long
er than the 15 billion years it has already been expanding. So, you will have ti
me to sell your government bonds, before the end of the universe is nigh. Quite
what you invest in then, I don't know.
Originally, I thought that the collapse, would be the time reverse of the expans
ion. This would have meant that the arrow of time would have pointed the other w
ay in the contracting phase. People would have gotten younger, as the universe g
ot smaller. Eventually, they would have disappeared back into the womb.
However, I now realise I was wrong, as these solutions show. The collapse is not
the time reverse of the expansion. The expansion will start with an inflationar
y phase, but the collapse will not in general end with an anti inflationary phas
e. Moreover, the small departures from uniform density will continue to grow in
the contracting phase. The universe will get more and more lumpy and irregular,
as it gets smaller, and disorder will increase. This means that the arrow of tim
e will not reverse. People will continue to get older, even after the universe h
as begun to contract. So it is no good waiting until the universe re-collapses,
to return to your youth. You would be a bit past it, anyway, by then.
The conclusion of this lecture is that the universe has not existed forever. Rat
her, the universe, and time itself, had a beginning in the Big Bang, about 15 bi
llion years ago. The beginning of real time, would have been a singularity, at w
hich the laws of physics would have broken down. Nevertheless, the way the unive
rse began would have been determined by the laws of physics, if the universe sat

isfied the no boundary condition. This says that in the imaginary time direction
, space-time is finite in extent, but doesn't have any boundary or edge. The pre
dictions of the no boundary proposal seem to agree with observation. The no boun
dary hypothesis also predicts that the universe will eventually collapse again.
However, the contracting phase, will not have the opposite arrow of time, to the
expanding phase. So we will keep on getting older, and we won't return to our y
outh. Because time is not going to go backwards, I think I better stop now.
--------------------------------

Imaginary time is a concept most popularly known because of its use by physicist
Stephen Hawking in his research on the origin of the universe and the relations
hip between time and space. The simplest definition of imaginary time is time me
asured by the use of imaginary numbers.
The mathematical concept of imaginary numbers was developed in the 16th century
in order to define the square root of a negative number. Just as imaginary numbe
rs should be seen as positioned at right angles to ordinary real numbers, so ima
ginary time can be described as existing at right angles to real time.
It seems to be unclear when and where the precise use of the term imaginary time
first came into being, though a number of sources have been identified in which
the essence of imaginary time was described.
An early example is a 1908 paper presented by German mathematician Hermann Minko
wski, proposing the concept of time as a fourth dimension. Another is a 1927 boo
k, An Experiment With Time, by J. W. Dunne, exploring the idea that the past, pr
esent, and future exist concurrently.
In modern mathematical and theoretical physics, imaginary time has been consider
ed to be a necessary element in research involving various particle and field th
eories. It also has practical applications in such fields as engineering.
fundamental aspect
fundamental aspect
A fundamental aspect of Hawking s research has been an attempt to develop a quantu
m theory of gravity. General relativity does not work well on small distances an
d does not take the uncertainly principle of quantum mechanics into account.
That principle states that the more accurately a position can be measured, the l
ess accurately speed can be measured. The reverse is also true. As part of this
research, Hawking has made use of imaginary time a theoretical concept arising fro
m quantum theory.
Hawking points out that imaginary time is well defined mathematically. And, thou
gh it sounds like a creation straight out of science fiction, he makes a case fo
r it being just as real in its own way as is the real time within which we norma
lly operate perhaps more real in describing the actual axis of the universe.
Starting from the concept that the validity of any mathematical formula applied
to our universe must describe it accurately, Hawking asserts that the use of ima
ginary time does produce results that we have already observed about the univers
e and that it is also supported by other observations, even though those may nee
d further study and proof. This approach has been labeled top-down cosmology.
Hawking and physicist James B. Hartle have applied the concept of imaginary time
in their research on the origin of the universe, including their efforts to dev

elop a unified theory derived from Einstein s theory of relativity and from Richar
d Feynman s concept of multiple possible histories of the universe.
In his sum-over-histories theory, Feynman considered time to be a dimension in s
pace that could move both backward and forward, allowing for variant pasts and f
utures. Hawking later stated that the idea of multiple histories of the universe
is now accepted as fact.
big bang
big bang
The big bang, now generally thought to have created the universe about 15 billio
n years ago, has been described as a singularity in ordinary time, or a point at
which the spacetime curvature and the density of matter were infinite.
But in imaginary time, it can be envisioned merely as a single point, such as th
e earth s north pole, with no beginning or end. Knowledge of the state of the univ
erse in imaginary time can allow for the calculation of its state in real time,
and, since the latter is dependent on the former, the universe can be described
as a self-contained system.
In one model, the universe could be envisioned as a sphere with four dimensions,
but with a slightly flattened south pole. Had the universe remained a perfect s
phere in imaginary time, it would have continued to expand forever. Instead, the
re was an initial burst of expansion, followed by a decrease that allowed for th
e development of galaxies and life.
In another model, the universe would resemble a nutshell, or a membrane, with fo
ur dimensions. It would still be a sphere, but with some irregularities. The int
erior of the membrane might represent a fifth dimension where no time exists.
In real time, the occurrence of the big bang would have indicated that the laws
of physics had broken down. But, since imaginary time does not necessitate that
the universe have a beginning or an end or any boundaries, the laws of physics w
ould still have been in operation.
radio broadcast
radio broadcast
On a BBC radio broadcast, Hawking clarified that determining that the universe f
ollowed the laws of physics when it began would neither prove nor disprove that
God exists but it does indicate that there was nothing arbitrary about the process
.
Hawking points out that the classical laws of physics work for large systems bec
ause the many changes that occur can be averaged for predictability. But when th
e big bang occurred, the universe was very small, making the uncertainly princip
le important at that early time.
Hawking adds that changes in microwaves coming from space have allowed us to obs
erve the probable small changes occurring in the history of the universe. In 199
2, NASA s COBE (Cosmic Background Explorer satellite) detected such rregularities
and provided evidence supporting the big bang theory.
Hawking and most other physicists make it clear that many of the concepts they h
ave proposed are theories yet to be proven. As with any scientific effort, it is
important that physicists build on the work of others.
But it is also inevitable that they will not always be in agreement on the speci
fics. Yet Hawking and other physicists have expressed optimism that combined res

earch efforts will produce a unified theory of the universe in the near future.
When that occurs, Hawking anticipates that such a theory would be available to p
eople in all walks of life, enabling enlightened discussion on the reason for th
e existence of the universe and its inhabitants.
------------------