 That's a clip from the Netflix series Black Mirror. That particular episode is Archangel about an overzealous parent who suffers the unintended consequences of using some really cool technology to make her daughter's life better and more safe. Of course, I could have picked just about any episode of Black Mirror to highlight the dystopian 1984 Orwellian future that so many are predicting will come with technology advances. But what is different about this show and what I'm super excited to bring you about this show is we're going to talk to someone, quantum Doug, Dr. Quantum Doug, who really has the chops PhD in quantum computing over 20 years experience as a senior member of the technical staff of Texas Instruments. And Doug can take us not just from the technology, but he can bridges to extended consciousness and the metaphysical spiritual aspect of this. It's a deep dive. So I have a lot of clips that I want to play for you to try and motivate you to hang in there just like I had to. Yeah, it is. But I got Michael Scott this little bit. Explain it to me like I'm five years old. That's the part that people can't understand about entanglement is that you can't have entanglement unless you have four dimensions. But every EBIT has its own four dimensions private dimensions, because otherwise they interact. So that means that there's a gazillion dimensions out there. And we can show that with Shor's algorithm in that the number of dimensions that you have in quantum computing is two to the power of q, where q is the number of qubits. And if you have two to the 300 qubits, you have 300 qubits, which would allow you to break using Shor's algorithm. Every encryption in any internet in the world. It's just like gravity works independent of whether you believe in it or not, right? And most people don't realize that relativity is also doing its thing independent whether you believe it or not. But guess what? If you didn't believe in it, none of our GPS's would work. All the satellites in up in space have to synchronize their clocks with respective relativity, or none of our GPS would work. It's proto physics. It's not metaphysics. It's proto physics. It's imagine if the quantum states, quantum stuff was marked as black magic and nobody did anything about it. Our society right now would be no have no lasers, no, no computers, no transistors, nothing. No, nothing. Love it. But Doug, this is where we part ways. Who the fuck thinks Google is interested in helping fucking society? What evidence? No, I'm dead fucking serious. Welcome to Skeptico where we explore controversial science and spirituality with leading researchers, thinkers and their critics. I'm your host Alex Cares. And today we're joined by Dr. Doug Matzke. And he's here to talk about his new book, Deep Reality. Why source science. And in a minute, Doug will tell us what that means. Maybe the key to understanding human potential. It's a book that he co authored with the very well known and highly regarded Stanford scientist, Dr. William Tiller. You know, if you go to Amazon like I did, you can actually read this book for free if you have Kindle Unlimited, which is quite incredible, especially given what an amazing book it is. And how informed this guy is, quantum Doug, Dr. Quantum Doug. I mean, hold on. This guy has a fricking PhD in quantum computing from the University of Texas. And he's not just a really smart guy like academically smart theoretical physics smart in a way that we all wouldn't understand, which is all that. But he spent 20 years at Texas Instruments. And we're going to talk about that for a minute. I was there at Texas Instruments for a while where you're there. I was just an intern, but whatever. Working on some of the most advanced artificial intelligence chip technology in the world. He worked on the famous Lisp chip, which if you can get over the fact that it was put into those drone bombs that Obama sent over to strike on Yemen wedding parties. Beside that, I mean, it's making America great again, kind of thing. I guess I don't know. But this guy really, really knows his stuff. And what's really remarkable about this from a kind of skeptical perspective, the stuff that we like to talk about. Doug is not just here to talk about quantum computing, artificial intelligence, strong AI and all that stuff, which I am going to talk to him at great length about that because there's so few people who can make that connection between theoretical quantum physics that is central to what we're all about right now, our technology and our science, but make that connection to the real world. It's happening now in terms of quantum computing reality. And Doug can nail that down. He really knows what he's talking about. But if you want to talk about next level metaphysics and connecting all that stuff to metaphysics, which we always do and everyone wants to go, Oh, that's so woo woo. No, this guy will take the whole path from real life today, quantum computing, as it's happening, as it's about to happening, the stuff that you don't even hear about, he can take you there. And then he can talk about near death experiences. And he can talk about Monroe Institute and out of body travel and projecting into utopian realities, time traveling into the future. And then if you want to talk about controversial stuff, like transgender issues, strong AI, simulation hypothesis, and how that all might relate to Doug's understanding of what he's calling source science, which is really just another way of saying quantum physics in a way. I mean, like I say, it's remarkable, remarkable stuff. Doug and I were talking just a minute ago that, you know, hey, maybe he doesn't have as many media appearances as some other people do. I don't know. I watched a couple of his presentations on YouTube and it's like, fantastic stuff. I read the book. It's powerful stuff. And I think that the reason why we are not more welcoming as an overall society, collective science community to Doug's work, I think might turn out to be part of this story. But we got to get to the guy and talk to him. Dr. Doug, thanks for joining me on Skepticoat. I'm so glad you're here. Hey, yeah, thanks, Alex. I appreciate it. So tell us a little bit about this remarkable book. What is source science? Yeah, exactly. Well, part of the thing that's going on in the metaphysics area, but also in the regular, you know, AI even, you know, it's like everybody's trying to figure out, well, how are we smart, you know, and how are we intelligent? Where is come from, you know, and ultimately, and like, even if you include the law of attraction, law of attraction says, well, where's meaning come from? Well, that all has to do with our underlying model of how we represent thoughts and meaning, which is what AI is about to write. And so the question is, if you understand that the universe is ultimately quantum mechanical, you know, Feynman says the world is not classical, damn it, it's quantum mechanical, right? And so when you realize that you go, well, how does that relate to all of these topics that we're just listing here? It turns out that if you look at, ultimately, the physics has bits, part of physics, in other words, you no longer treat bits as computer science anymore, physics, bits are physics, it's physics, the physics of black holes and hold on, Doug, hold on, we're already going to lose people. And there's no need to lose people because your book is incredibly lucid and accessible on that level. Okay, it quickly gets deep, you can quickly kind of drive off the cliff here. But let's start with something simple. What we talk about a lot of time on this show is the old double slit experiment. So take us through the double slit experiment and then explain for us like you do really beautifully. And I always point this out to people. What Dean Raiden, Dr. Dean Raiden, who many people know and wrote just a glowing review of your book. So take us to the old double slit experiment, which I often say, you know, is really should be renamed as the consciousness is real experiment, but how we got from there. And then how there was all this confusion about it that was created. And then what Dean Raiden did really kind of bury that once and for all from a metaphysical standpoint. Yeah, yeah. The double slit experiment ties all those things that we're just talking about together, because it says, look, at the very low level, quantum mechanics is real. Right. And it has this weird property where everything is a wave, even a single electron interacting with itself acts like a wave, not multiple electrons, just a single electron. So it goes through both slits at one time. And when you put that in a box, it's automated and shielded consciousness will affect that. And that's sort of this whole, how can intention in and consciousness affect quantum mechanics is sort of the fundamental thing that Dean Raiden's experiment did. And once you realize, Oh, maybe quantum mechanics and thought are really the same thing. So it's not unusual that they would interact. Sort of that's the model what I call source science, is that those things are really the same thing. And then how I support that argument through, you know, 400 pages of the book is is the is the insight that I had. In fact, this book was written purely as pretty much as insight. It's like, I don't take credit for the book as much as I sort of like channel the book if you want to think about it that way. I don't want to think about it that way, because it's control a lot of people off. I mean, all the point is it's it's intellect and insight at the same time. So you know, and I only wrote when I was inspired, I didn't write when I was forcing to get it done. So it took me five years to write the book. Oh, I can imagine. No, it's it's it's theory of everything kind of level, but with backing it up, you know, kind of thing. Let me I feel like we're still not touching people or and maybe we are maybe we're and I don't know, but like your your dissertation, I don't understand your dissertation from crap. But a couple of the buzzwords that I pulled out of it is the standard model. Okay, so that means CERN. That means they built this huge frickin hydron collider ring miles and miles up in the Alps to slam these things together so they could find all the little pieces that we hypothesize are there aren't really there. You come along and you go Oh, okay, I can do that just with math, just with math. Yeah. So yeah, take us through that at a super high level in terms of what's going on with quantum mechanics that people don't understand. You know, we you just talked about the the double slit experiment, but people still don't understand it. And then they still don't understand. So the double slit experiment right is you shoot the photon beam. And sometimes it looks like a wave. Sometimes it looks like a particle. It shouldn't be it should either be a wave or it should be a particle. And then the conclusion is aha, the observer effect comes out of that if I observe if a tree falls in the forest, then it's a way if it doesn't, then it's a article kind of thing. And that you're kind of saying yeah, but it's much, much, much bigger than that. And how does that relate to so that's the idea of this term you're using source science. It's like, right, keep drilling down drilling down drilling down. The reason that the double slit experiment looks so weird is because they just don't really want to embrace what's down there at that lower level. Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. So the key insight from this is that even quantum computing, which is what I did for my dissertation, just bits under there. And those bits are just like we would think about them in computer science, they're ones and zeros. But they happen to be represented in a mathematical way, that you can say computer science and physics can use the same representation that would brilliance of the geometric algebra. So once you have a common language now where computer science and physics can talk together, and you can treat bits as though they're physics. That's the insight that started this whole thing. Does that make sense? Did I make that clear? I think it does. You know what really helped me a lot. And I thought, you know, because talk about the coin demonstration, because from an information standpoint, there's a little bit of an aha moment that I think a lot of people will grasp. Yeah. Yeah, imagine that you have, I have something behind my back, right? And I'm going to hold it out and there's a coin there in my hand, okay? And then I'm going to put it back behind my hand. And then I'm going to show again, what looks like a similar coin, maybe identical coin, right? And if I put it back in and say, how many coins do I have? And this is, this is this demo was created by my colleague, Mike Manthee. And he and the answer is, well, you have one coin, or maybe you have more than one coin, right? So there's like a bit of information. Now if I take my coin, the handout, and I show you both coins at the same time, I've just given you a bit of information, right? Right, Alex? It's either one or more than one, right? And I just, you got a bit of information. Now, you know, there's two. And the question is, where did that bit come from? Where did that new information come from? Right? Yeah, where did that bit of information come from? And the only way that it can happen is if you have them concurrently presented at the same time. Let's trace that back if we can to kind of the way we all know, quote unquote, computers work, right? Something is either on or it's off, you either turn on that little donut or you turn it off. And now, help us understand how you've just kind of smashed that model a little bit. Yeah, even Turing computing, which is supposed to be von Neumann computing and Turing computing is supposed to be more sequential. But here, concurrency itself affects bits at the physics level. And that's a new concept. This is what we call non-channel information. And it's non-causal information because, you know, even if you have physics, you have to say, well, I have two electrons hitting at the same time. Well, what is the same timing? That's a concurrent event, right? Well, relativity says there is no such thing as concurrent events. It's all relative, right? So there's this sort of like questions the whole notion of concurrency in a quantum mechanics perspective. And now that tie that to another mystery that people have in their head, but they don't really understand how it fits in. But what we all know kind of what entanglement is. Yeah. So what does entanglement say about concurrency? Absolutely. Even entanglement is the second step in quantum mechanics. If you're going to try to learn a little bit about quantum mechanics in this lecture here, in this interview that we're going to do here, then one thing you have to realize that qubit is really two bits that can be sort of like both on and off at the same time, right? And regular, regular coin cannot be on and off at the same time. But eventually, if you had two of those two bits, and now you have this what's called a phase angle, this 45 degree phase angle that can be both on and off at the same time, right? So if you have two of those qubits topologically, then you have what's called an EBIT, an entangled bit, and you can prepare it in such a way that there are two things acting like one. In fact, in the geometric algebra, it looks like a higher dimensional version of a qubit. Exactly the same. No, you're just too frickin smart, Doug. I swear. You just are. But if you could just those two concepts and know that they're related, and geometric algebra gives you the clue about how they're related, then that's the fun part of it. And you go, Oh, so that's the root of sore science. Yeah, it is. But I got a Michael Scott this a little bit. Explained it to me like I'm five years old. But let me say this, when you were at Texas Instruments, right? Yeah, you guys were making these chips. Yeah, and you were using more as law. A lot of people knows what more as law is to get denser and denser, more and more transistors and more and more information packed into those chips. At some point, you got or you are getting to the point where you go, gee, golly darn, we just can't lie those wires any closer together. Because why can't you at a very real, you know, I also talked to this guy, Bernardo Castro, and he works for a high tech company that makes the machines that do all this kind of stuff. And so explain it and to explain entanglement from that perspective in terms of gosh, Janet, we can't do it anymore. Well, this notion of limits of computing, I think that's what you're talking about here, right? Limits of computing, which is what I'm trying to get to is that entanglement isn't a fuzzy, phony, hairy, airy, fairy concept. It's like, you can't do shit that you want to do because of entanglement. Yes. In fact, many quantum properties entanglement is one of them where you realize quantum mechanics is generally fuzzy. And because of entanglement, they're correlated at a distance. That's what entanglement does for you. The superposition part of quantum mechanics is probability. That means it's fuzzy. That and, you know, that the fact that you, you can't look into a qubit and know what it is without destroying it, right? There's a no cloning principle in quantum mechanics. It says you can't even know the state of the quantum bit. So talk about fuzzy, right? If you take two of those qubits and create entanglement, now you have two things acting like one, even though they're far apart. And that can't be done in classical physics at all. In fact, Einstein said, oh, this isn't, this isn't real. In fact, Einstein said, for many years, he says, this is spooky action at a distance, right? And finally, in the 60s, bell, John Bell says, no, this is real. And you can't do it any other way except through quantum mechanics. Now they're the Chinese and everybody else is building quantum entangled chips, you know, that allow you to send entangled stuff around. So it's technology now, you know, so it's real. And guess what? You can't have any bit unless you have four dimensions. So how do those four dimensions, again, comes out of the geometric algebra. How does that four dimensions interact with the three dimensions that does our universe, right? That's where your head goes pow, you know, right off the top. Great, great. That's where your head goes pow. You got a great, you got a great line in the book that maybe you can further elaborate on this. Sure. So what you're discovering. And as you say, you know, we're all enamored by technology. And you just made an offhand remark, you know, like, Oh, yeah, the Japanese have like, basically a modem that they can now send this information because entangled particles move at we don't even can't even calculate. I mean, it's simultaneous. How can it move around the world simultaneously? I don't know. It does it. That's a reality. Quantum computers, AlphaGo, Google, that's a reality. It doesn't fit all problems. It may fit more and more problems in the future. But quantum computers are real things. Absolutely. Then what you say, that only works because of an understanding of a multi dimensional reality. And yet, we understand our reality to be three dimensional. So now we're forced to pick, okay, which reality do we want? We have this hard evidence that this is the ultimate reality. It's greater than this. But we have a tendency to say, no, no, no, no, let's force it back into this old thing we're comfortable with called this 3D reality. Absolutely. Absolutely. Do you want to speak to that? Because that's the that's the launching off point in your book to the whole discussion of metaphysics. If you believe like Feynman says the universe mechanical, but still, you have to say, well, how does it even, you know, that's the part that people can't understand about entanglement is that you can't have entanglement unless you have four dimensions. But every EBIT has its own four dimensions, private dimensions, because otherwise they interact. So that means that there's a gazillion dimensions out there. And we can show that with Schor's algorithm, in that the number of dimensions that you have in quantum computing is two to the power of q, where q is the number of qubits. And if you have two to the 300 qubits, you have 300 qubits, which would allow you to break using Schor's algorithm. Every encryption in any internet in the world, if you could build a 300 bit qubit, that's bigger than most 256 bit encryption codes that we use on our for all of our secure communications. Yeah, everything you're saying is is so like we said at the beginning, it's just so important. It just really is. It's so fundamentally important. That's not out there. You don't have 100 interviews out there, Doug. I don't know why, but you don't have a TED talk with 5 million views. I don't know why you don't. It's like fundamentally important. So yeah, bringing it down to reality that people can relate to. Okay. Go to Netflix and watch the AlphaGo documentary. It's a fascinating documentary. We've all heard about how computers can solve problems that we think are demonstrating human intelligence. So chess, you know, oh, a computer can play chess. Deep Blue beats the best chess player. Well, it turns out an even more complicated computer problem is the game go. It's very popular in Asia. It's less popular here, but acknowledge is kind of the ultimate thinking game. So the good people at Google set about funding this little group to go see if they could beat the best go player and the documentary I would highly recommend and people watch it and there's going to be an interesting connection we're going to try and make between the AI that they use to solve go to solve the go problem and beat the best go player in the world, which isn't quantum by the way. And then how that might become quantum and how it could lead to even really whipping the guy's butt even quicker. And then as you throw in the book. Yeah. And by the way, Google totally realizes this and they're building their only quantum their own quantum computer and they're at like what 38 qubit or something you said when we get to 300 it's like game over for any encryption. They're at 38 and then break that down for us to in terms of what that means because that's like already bigger than like if you put all the super computers in the world in a room, you'd be bigger than that at solving some problems. So there's a lot to unravel there, please. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. So the point I was making about the 300 is that two to the 300. It's hard for people to imagine how big that is the power of exponential, but two to the 300 is more particles in the known universe. It's that big. Okay, so even if you had every particle in the universe to be a computer that was working on solving that problem, they would all have to work together even though there's, you know, 30 billion light years away from each other working together to solve that problem. So quantum computing sheets, it has two to the 300 states, sort of like Dr. Who's time machine, you know, where it's got this much bigger space behind it than it looks like from looking at the phone booth, right? So quantum computing is like that, essentially. It's using all of these states out there. And we would say physicists would say, well, those are mathematical. No, they're real because they can compute. And what if humans tap into that state space and do things that we didn't expect them to do, right? So that's how it connects those two things. Well, and I think, you know, the main thrust of your book is that humans already do connect and that our misunderstanding has been that we don't connect and that we've adopted a model for how human consciousness works, that is conveniently or intentionally dumbed down in order to kind of push certain ideas. But I do want to return to the Alpha Go thing because I think it's a great, a great example. It's like, if you're like me, I like to play online chess occasionally. And I'm really not very good at it at all. But one of the things that always gives me is a reminder as one, as a kid in Pakistan, who's 12 years old, kicks my butt, or as the computer, if I ever turn it on full speed, just destroys me. That, you know, my level of kind of cognitive processing of that level, you know, it's kind of narrow, but it's just, it's humbling, right? Okay, I get it. I have all these thoughts going through my head. I'm really not that smart. And then, so then you take Alpha Go and you go, okay, now we're upping the level like this guy who's the Alpha Go champ is like, just a lot smarter, you know, you talk to me, he's a lot smarter. And then you see not only that the computer beats him, but the thing I got out of that, and I don't know if you remember this from the movie or just from, you know, your knowledge of it. Yeah. What it revealed was an entirely different strategy that people who've played Go for 1000 years or 2000, however long, hadn't really fully considered. And that's that you don't have to destroy the other opponent. All you have to do is win by the slightest margin. So if you get to any point where you can calculate it out all the way and say, I'll win by the slightest margin. So the point is that strategically, this kind of next level thinking was done by the computer. And what does that mean when we make the transition as you're talking about in terms of saying, you know what really this is what I hear you saying, and I want you to speak to, because I never knew this until I read your book, is that I always thought quantum computing would be limited to certain classes of problems. Because right now, that's the only thing we can apply it to. And what I hear you saying in the book is, yeah, well, that's where we're at now, but eventually we'll do everything with it, because it's closer to the source of how everything really works. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. And imagine, I mean, my instinct for going and working on my PhD was, what if we could take any algorithm and parallelize it and speed it up using quantum computing, right? And the question is, is that what we're doing with our mind anyhow? You know, and so we only have a limited sense of what algorithms actually speed up. But gosh, if you're cheating, and you have this infinite dimensional hyperspace that you have tapped into, then essentially, you think of it as both computing and memory. I mean, think of it as a computing simulator big enough to run the entire physical universe in. That's a pretty powerful computing paradigm. And it's really there because otherwise quantum computing wouldn't work. And quantum computing is the basis of all our physics, including the big bang in black holes and everything else. So it's there. How do we tap into it is the big question. So let me see if I understand what you're saying, because I took this out of the book, but you just kind of made it click for me in a different way. Sure. And that's that if we understand everything you're saying about quantum physics, and more importantly, but I hate new terms, you know, like source science, I think throws everybody. What the hell do we need a new term for? Well, we do. I didn't want to use spirited science. So I tried to come up with a slightly more technical terms. Yeah. And spirited science doesn't really work either because we don't know what the hell spirits are. You know, I think what what I hear you saying is why, you know, the other thing other than science as we know it, which has been completely falsified and is dopey and leads us in the wrong direction, why the other science, the real science behind it. And then but what I heard you just say a minute ago, I want you to speak up, speak to is that you you hypothesize what if we could improve the efficiency or the processing of the processes slash algorithms that are already operating what I hear you really saying is that your emotions are operating on that heart math is operating on that your intuition is operating on that your law of attraction is operating on all that. So you don't realize it and you've been convinced that all that's woo woo and you don't have to pay any attention to it. But if we know anything about this source science, then we know that there seems to be some underlying reality to that. And maybe we need to pay attention to it and understand how it's processing reality. Yeah, absolutely. A lot of people are working on law of attraction, call it source, right? So that's why I called it source science to tap it into connected to the law of the law of attraction and realize that law of attraction does what it does independent of whether you believe in it or not. It's just like gravity works independent of whether you believe in it or not. Right. And most people don't realize that relativity is also doing its thing independent whether you believe it or not. But guess what, if you didn't believe in it, none of our GPS's would work. All the satellites in up in space have to synchronize their clocks with respect to relativity or none of our GPS would work. So whether you believe in it or not is immaterial. Now, if you were to believe in it, what could you do with it? And that's the big insight I'm trying to get people to say, it's reality. Let's use it. And this isn't about artificial intelligence about accelerating humans, not about accelerating our machines, if you want to think about it that way. Yeah, well, if we have time, we're going to have a good talk about that. I'm going to wind us back to Dean Raiden. Yeah, I have a lot of respect for Dean Raiden. So do I. And I want to go back to that experiment because this history of the double slit slash consciousness slash a tree falls in the forest experiment was obscured from our understanding for the longest time. So Richard Feynman is awesome, but Richard Feynman was also the shut up and calculate guy, whether he was that, whether he wanted to be or not, it was like, hey, screw all your super philosophical mysticism, shit, let's build some stuff because we've got to build this thing up a time. I just built that atomic bomb we were working on. And woo-hoo, that was great. We saved the world. That's what you want to believe. So yeah, really. So it's like, OK, let's, you know, use this stuff because just like you're talking about now, you know, but so with, yeah, with respect for the fact that we don't want to destroy ourselves. Right. But a lot of those people didn't have that respect or have that sensibility or even if they did, their bosses didn't, you know, their bosses thought different about it. And if we go back and look through history and particularly, we look at the missile crisis and in the 60s, there are a bunch of very serious people that didn't have that sensibility and we're like, yeah, maybe we can survive this. We'll kill 30 million of theirs and they'll only kill 10 million of ours. And then we can, you know, those were the those are the calculations that a lot of people were doing back then and maybe still today in places we don't know about. But back to our buddy, Dean Raiden. Dean Raiden says, hey, you guys have lost your way on this double slit experiment. You've turned it into this hokey. Oh, it doesn't matter. Just put it over here on the side. Call it the observer effect, just like we say, you know, the placebo effect and we label it and then we forget it. And then Dean Raiden did an experiment that kind of just nailed it down once and for all. Do you want to describe that experiment? Because I've heard a video where you did. Yeah, the the took the standard physics twin slit experiment. And then but he completely automated it so that it could be running by itself. Gathering statistics and he used a light light detector in the back, OK, and he and he used it where he used the single single electron case, I think, is is where only one electron was going through. So it wasn't any kind of group for dynamics. It was one electron going through both slits, right? And then he collected the data without anybody paying attention to it. And then he paid it, asked collected more data during the experiment when people were saying, put your attention on this and try to affect the result. And it showed that consciousness and intention can directly impact quantum mechanics, even though it's shield from the entire world. And that is Nobel Prize level work. OK, people have gotten Nobel prizes for a lot less. OK, right. And so the point is he every everybody in science should have been saying, wow, this changes everything. And it was kind of ignored, you know, and so hats off to Dean for thinking of the experiment and then getting the funding and getting the work to get it done and then putting it online so people could interact with it remotely. So he did all of that over many years and publish the results. And so he deserves all the credit of doing all of that. And now that we have that as a model, I got two more experiments that we can do that are similar to that that shows fundamentally that consciousness and quantum mechanics are fundamentally tied together. Here's the here you want to hear what one of those are. OK, take the entangled experiment, entanglement experiment that you would test to see if the two things were entanglement. Any time you have statistics that are not that are abnormal, it's mean some kind of physics is going on. Right. An entanglement shows that you have something that's entangled. It's correlated on the other sides. So they're either both the same or both opposite, depending on how it's prepared, they're they're correlated and you can't determine that unless you compare notes. Right. But there's two sides. There's either they're both the same or both opposite or it's destroyed. So it's random and they're not correlated at all. Right. Well, you could use an intention experiment to affect entanglement. Now, what's different about that is the only way you let's say you could flip it from being aligned to be opposite aligned. Let's say you could do that with your mind. The only way to do that without destroying the entanglement state and still have it be correlated is that if your mind could touch both ends of the entangled state at the same time and that you can't fake no matter how you try it. So that's my other experiment that I'd like to go get done. So that's another example of his insight allowed us to think about even more fantastic experience like that. You mentioned in the book, there's like a lot of these little kind of almost throw away lines that could be. Yeah, like a Nobel Prize winning research kind of thing. So one of the things about that experiment is. What does that experiment say about time travel? And what does that experiment say about? Where we. Where our consciousness exists because there's some really, really deep implications to what what is what does space even mean now? What is time even? Obviously, what is time even mean? And then you would be showing that on this kind of physical 3D level while you're doing the experiment on a. Zillion dimensional. Yeah, the point is as soon as you start getting comfortable with the universe is really hyper dimensional. You do exactly what you just did question everything. OK, and most physicists never go there. You know, they just think they don't even want to think about it. And and even the mathematicians hardly think about it. But think about this. If your consciousness is not in the brain, where is it? And what is it made of? And my belief is that it's bits at this proto dimensional bits at the quantum level that still make up quantum mechanics. That's what thoughts are made of. And those thoughts are nowhere. And no, when and everywhere and everyone, in other words, they're outside space and time. They have to be even quantum mechanics has to be outside of space and time. Otherwise, entanglement wouldn't work, right? You can't have non locality if you're in space. So that that you're chuckling there, but it's a super profound point. Explain back to your experiment that you're going to run there, Doug. That's hope. Yeah, let's do that. Where where are those two entangled bits? Where where are they? Where could they be potentially? Could they be really close together? Could they be really far apart? Does it even make sense to talk about them as being close together or far apart when they have this entangled property to them? Yeah, yeah. Well, you're familiar with Flatworld, right? This notion that you only have two dimensions and that third dimension doesn't make any sense. Well, we're stuck in a three dimensional world and we have a hard time understanding what for a four dimensional thing is, but in a four dimensional object like like an entangled bit is a four dimensional object. That extra dimension is local to it. So it's it's hard for us to imagine a four dimensional hyper cube, but there are some videos out there about if you take a four dimensional hyper cube, it looks like a cube nested within a cube and then you start rotating it and it like turns in on itself. You know, we have a hard time imagining that. Well, what if you thought that the consciousness was a million dimensions? Then how do you think about it? So what I guess one of my strengths is I can envision hyper dimensional spaces really well. And that's how I'm able to do this without getting lost. Now, how can I use words to explain somebody who's caught in three dimensions? How to do that? It's hard to do that. You could have to kind of do it with insight and mathematics. And so some of the neural computing stuff I talk about, the correlational algorithm stuff that I talk about in there allows you to start using mathematics to look not only at quantum computing, hyper dimensional spaces, but how it's related to neural computing. Those get you to start thinking about hyper dimensional spaces. Those hyper dimensional spaces cannot exist in space and time. So what is the paradigm then? It's just like entangled bits. It's what's called space like convention, which is a physics term. And it basically says these two points in our space time. Are not be able to be connected by something that's running at the speed of light. And that's space like versus time like versus light like. And once you realize consciousness is space like, then it's like, well, of course, it can't fit in the brain. It's space like. And then where is it? It's everywhere and nowhere. So I want to go down this path of the law of attraction thing. And yeah. Yeah, I think it's it brings up so many of the kind of cool stuff that you're talking about in the bridge to metaphysics. It also brings up some of the really troublesome parts. You know, I mean, Jay-Z Knight, she's created this cult is channeling ramp up. Maybe she is. Maybe she isn't. But she's also smoking cigarettes off the side of the stage and talking about scamming people by buying horses for three hundred and fifty dollars and selling them for one hundred and fifty thousand dollars. And so there's all this stuff. And that's all been revealed by insiders. And I haven't talked to recently a member of that cult. People don't like the term cult. I don't know. I don't know what you want to call it, whatever. But that's, you know, they were the people behind the secret movie that popularized the love traction way back when. That doesn't mean that that's the only way to look at it. But yeah, I digress like I like to because in the book, deep reality that everybody has to read because if you're at Amazon Unlimited, you get to read it for free, but go ahead and buy the paperbacks of Doug and Dr. Tiller and are going to at least get a couple of bucks from this. Do you offer signed copies of it or anything like well with the with the I mean, I have author copies. OK, I just don't have a way of mailing them. Easily go to the post office. So I know, you know. So at some point, I'm going to do that. But let's say it might be a year from now. OK, people have asked me and I'm like, Wolf, God, I so appreciate you asking. But what a pain in the but anyways, yeah, so back to, you know, deep reality and the law of attraction thing. Yeah. One of the things that again is a little bit uncomfortable to talk about, but I love the way you approach it is. What about people who are really, really smart? What do we do with that? Like you're really, really smart and like you just said, you have this ability to, you know. Be comfortable with hyper dimensional realities and be able to process that information in your head and then you're an effective communicator enough to tell that to other people. And I don't want to put other people down because there's people who have, you know, quote, unquote disabilities and they turn out to be super gifted and super off the charts. We all get that. But on another level that we don't often talk about, there's just people that are smarter. And then when you talk about it in the book from a metaphysical standpoint and an extended consciousness, as I like to call it standpoint, it gets really interesting because there's all sorts of people that have transcendental experiences where they enter in this space where they are really smart, right? So people have a near death experience and they say stuff like before I could even formulate the question, the answer was in my head. They say stuff like I knew everything. I don't know how else to put it, but everything I could possibly think of, I knew the answer to. And then they say something interesting as it relates to both your book and your understanding this reality is that when I came back in and I jammed it back inside my body, inside that antenna of my brain, it wasn't like that. I can't tell you now everything that I knew. Yeah. So what do you think about that? And then then we'll go from there because I also want to talk about augmented reality and artificial reality and artificial intelligence as it relates to that. But start with just don't we have to come to grips with there going to be some people who are going to be smart enough to understand some of this stuff and there's going to be some people who aren't. Well, I believe ultimately everybody whether they're aware of it or not are constructed this way. In other words, we're not some of us have a mind outside of our brain and others don't, you know, in other words that some of us our brain is our mind and others the mind is separate from the brain. I don't think that's the case. I think we're all the same and that's probably true for animals as well. So the reason I say that is because everybody is sort of like focused in on space on their brain. But as soon as you can release that a little bit, then you can realize that there is you can tap into those higher dimensions. And so everybody can have this divine experience if you want to call it, you know, tasting the divine as I call it. I've done it several times in my life, one at the Monroe Institute and other times as well. And where you go, oh, I'm tasting the divine. I get what they're talking about. I commune literally taught and they talk back with four leaf clovers. And you can think my spirit guys were giving me physics lessons. I mean, it's like, huh, this isn't made up because I didn't invent that stuff. It's coming from the outside. And so as long as you can realize that you can distinguish between your inside thoughts and thoughts that are coming from somewhere and you can discriminate between that, then you can say, ah, inside is coming from my higher self or however you want to label it or my spirit guides or whatever you want to call it. And so law of attraction is all about things with similar meaning somehow have to be near each other that you can attract them, right? That's what law of attraction is all about. But physics gives you no mechanism for meaning. It's not electromagnetic. It's not gravity. It's not quark. There is no there's not magnetic. There is no mechanism for law of attraction. So you have to have a hyperdimensional model. And that's sort of how it bridges the quantum to the to the neural model that I have. And you know, and both of those things rely on hyperdimensional spaces and the properties of hyperdimensional spaces. So in your mind, law of attraction, it's just like an ebit. Ebit is four dimensions. Well, your mind is a million dimensions and you can attract like-minded things in that hyperdimensional space as like you're a little spaceship traveling around picking up things and collecting things and bringing things near you. And so they show up, whether you believe in it or not, just because that's how our mind works. That's how our memory works. Our memory is addressing information in this hyperdimensional space. You don't need a memory in your brain. It's it's already stored in a way that can never be destroyed. And that's what you have when you have a life review. All of a sudden, you're not in time anymore. And you're all of a sudden open to all thoughts that you've ever had. And you see that as a life review. So again, we're touching on several things. Hyperdimensional space and how that's can support these divine experiences and this expanded consciousness and expanded awareness. There's no space and time. That's how it's possible. Did that help at all? Yeah. You know, I just wrote a book Why Evil Matters, How Science and Religion Fumbled the Big One. And the premise of the book is that when we begin to start talking about these extended realities and we have to do that maybe evil is a lens for understanding that and then drives us to the moral imperative question, you know, is there right and wrong? Is there good? Is there God? How these are things that you are not uncomfortable talking about in the book. But I do kind of feel like you're not kind of squaring up completely with with what's going on because, first of all, what you just said about science is I no longer believe that scientific materialism, scientism is accidental. And I think this is a major failing of the frontier science community is that they're totally they've been brainwashed against any kind of conspiratorial thinking, even though conspiracies are all around us from, you know, we go back and look at histories and go, oh, gee, the Romans, it was just one conspiracy after another. That's how they ran the whole thing. Oh, we look at any point in history, go, oh, my God, it's one conspiracy after another. That's how they ran the whole thing. Then we look at our time and go, well, glad we're glad we're not like I mean, I agree with you. Well, the idea that the science as we know it has pushed this kind of absurd notion that wouldn't fit in any other time in history that we're biological robots, a meaningless universe that consciousness is an illusion. It's it's a complete it's a complete game. But what is the purpose of it? The purpose of it, to me, seems kind of clear. It's a PSI app. It's a social engineering project. And if I want to control people, I sure as hell want. I don't want them thinking they are limitless, expansive, divine beings. I want them to think that they're they're meaningless, number one, and that they don't really have any power. And then it's OK to be depressed. It's OK to be unhealthy. It's OK to be all these other things. I think science. I think that's one of the missteps here. Science is humming along just the way it wants to be. And the real players, of course, in the invisible college, they never bought into any of this bullshit or or they, you know, I mean, back to Feynman. So maybe Feynman really thought that for a while. But, you know, Einstein at the end of his life goes, OK, I give up. Yeah, it's not that. And maybe Feynman did too. But certainly, you know, you mentioned the guys. I always mentioned the guys that. I remember these other guys would also have the same thought. How was it at TI? I imagined it was both, you know, some people kind of see it for the absurdity that it is. And others probably just saw, hey, I just got to do my job. But like Stargate, you know, Russell Targon and how put off. I mean, they're working with it. You know, they're not pretending that consciousness is an illusion. Shit. And was it with your work at TI? Was it expansive in that kind of expanded consciousness thing? Or no, just kind of make the chips. Well, the good news is TI was a big company. And I had gotten to a point where I was a senior member of technical staff and I realized how to use the system. So I like got special funding inside the company to go and do two conferences on physics and computing. You know, so I basically doing my job full time and running these two conferences over four years. And the previous owner of those conferences was Tom Toffoli in 1981. And Richard Feynman was the keynote speaker of it. Nobody had had a conference like that since for 11 years until I did it. And I stumbled into it and they had Ralph Landauer as my keynote speaker and had a hundred people show up on the first conference. So the good news is it was big enough. But after I did the second one, my boss says, if you ever justify anything that you do using this argument again, you're going to have to go find somewhere else to work. So you're going to have to take off that gold badge and, you know, so I worked at TI. I was in the PhD. I was in the PhD program at University of Arizona. And I got an internship by this awesome guy who Warren, Warren hired me. I won't use his last name, but Warren hired me. God bless him. And then I came back and I taught classes. I was studying expert systems, which is really kind of a crude, crude, you know, thing. But I started my own company to do expert systems and I went back and TI was one of my clients. I went there all the time and it's an amazing culture. There's some super duper smart people. And as you describe it, you know, one of the cool things about TI is they did kind of give people some people who they recognize as, you know, truly kind of genius level. They kind of let them run off and do their thing. But like I said, it would rain you back in. Yeah, I was at the research. I was at the research labs, you know, which we'd expect to be able to do that kind of stuff. So what do you think about the state of science at, you know, TI at these secret government labs? I mean, shut up and calculate versus, you know, MKUltra. Let's get into the, let's do Dissociative Identity Disorder into the extended consciousness realms and see what we can stir up over in this extended consciousness. Yeah, this is an important topic that you're bringing up here because how right now most of the research in this area is like AI or quantum computing, but nobody's doing consciousness research in corporations, right? And I would say why not? Because it's the intersection of those two, right? So, you know, billions of dollars are spent on space travel, AI and quantum computing, billions, tens of millions, billions, right? This is bigger than that. In fact, you could think of this, my book is a business plan to get corporations of the world involved in this because it's real science. It's not, it's proto-physics. It's not metaphysics, it's proto-physics. It's, imagine if the quantum states, quantum stuff was marked as black magic and nobody did anything about it. Our society right now would be, no have no lasers, no computers, no transistors, nothing, no, nothing. We would not have optical networks. You know, if quantum computing was treated as something that we shouldn't work on by industry, our society would be completely different now. And I believe that in 50 years from now, investments in this area will make our world look completely different. And how do we do that? Is we have to balance the science part of it, the spirit side of it and the business side of it, right? Those three. And so that's why I say my book is the business plan for let's get corporate America involved and start investing the same amount of money that they're investing all these other stuff in. And there's a lot of people who $50 million or $500 million is a drop in the bucket, you know, and they'd be happy to go do it if sort of they had a reason to go do it. So I'm giving them the reason to go do it. So this isn't, we shouldn't have just, oh, can we get $50,000 to do the experiment? No, we need to have a long-term and keep the government out of it. I don't think we need the government in here. And the purpose of this should not be war, you know? This is gonna help society. This is like the next generation companies that do free software, right? I mean, this is like nonprofit organization to the max, you know? And so think of it, all the positive things that happen on free software, you know, free software that people, free software corporations and that kind of stuff. So there's my vision. So you tapped on, you tapped onto a hotspot for me because of that, I could be with Google, but there's this other new company that's gonna form that's not gonna be Google-based. Well, I mean, and let's understand that at like a real level. So what Google, what has Google done with the technology that they already have, which is bordering your business plan, right? So what the technology Google has is they have the AlphaGo technology. We talked about AlphaGo, but what AlphaGo really means is kind of this deep machine learning, right? So rather than- With the hardware to speed it up. So, and maybe you wanna talk about, I'll tell you what, I'm gonna go on my little rant just to finish the thought and then you can tell me about what machine learning. So, okay, where they're going, obviously with machine learning is the language would be the natural one, right? So, and they're already doing that. So shadow banning and restricting who speaks and how they speak and what they say is clearly part of their agenda and they've implemented it. And I have friends in Silicon Valley in five years when I told them, hey, my friends are saying their thing was demonetized. They absolutely refused to believe that. They absolutely refused to believe that Google would do something like just randomly secretly take some videos and say those no longer make any money and we won't explain why and we won't have any appeal process. We'll just do that. Now that's outed on a much more obvious level. Some of it is, some of it isn't. There's an AI component behind that. What does that mean when that gets sped up 10 times faster? The same thing with controlling books and information and controlling ultimately the internet completely. So it's wonderful to think about all the glorious things that can come out of this but what seems much more immediate for us is all the really scary shit that could come out of this with regard to controlling us. So let's talk a little bit about machine. Machine learning, AI, strong AI and the downside of it that's right at knocking at our door. Yeah, well, that's why I'm interested in leveraging humans rather than leveraging machines. So if you look, what the message is is that let's tap into the infinite intelligence that's supposed to be behind law of attraction and leverage people. What if we could meditate literally in a deep meditation 15 minutes a day, everybody really do that and change the sort of like the thought pattern of the entire world. We would no longer have this kind of hate-based competitive environment. We would be realized that we're all, there's an argument that says there's only one consciousness in the universe. It's all one and we're all part of that, right? And so that's one way of looking at it. Well, we realize we're all part of the same thing, you know? And that's part of touching the divine. You realize, oh, we're really all part of that, a subset of that divine and we're all really the same thing. But as long as we believe that we're disconnected and physical and that's it, then nobody's gonna invest in that and they're gonna try to take technological advantage of it. So I don't want my machine smarter I want my people smarter so that you make better decisions, make more unified decisions, more holistic decisions. All that's nice, you know, in the book that I just wrote, Why All Matters. One of the chapters is this interview I did with this woman. I always bring this up, it's uncomfortable for people. Her name is Anika Lucas. I know you're interested in yoga. I'm interested in yoga, done yoga for years and years. Love it from the philosophy standpoint also appreciate the practice. Anika is a yogi, she's beautiful. She does these training classes with incarcerated women in upstate New York to help them overcome trauma because she knows about overcoming trauma because it's six years old in Belgium. She was sold to a satanic ritual abuse cult by her mother, right, six years old, raped hundreds and hundreds of times by what she later identified as world leaders. This is part of the Dutro case. It's not like it was in the news. It was the pizza gate of its time. You could see the pictures, the kids in cages, the kids died when Dutro was arrested and wasn't able to go. It's a horrible thing. It's real. What they're doing is they are entering this extended consciousness realm and what they're trying to do with kids and what they're trying to do with the Whitley Streiber, the famous abductee who I interviewed just recently, is they're trying to create a disassociative identity disorder kind of situation where consciousness can be fragmented in order to explore how they can penetrate that and use that and weaponize that in some way. Why would do we think these people aren't accessing the quote unquote divine? They are in some ways closer to accessing this extended consciousness realm and they come to a different understanding of what they want out of it. So I'm just, I just think until we take a broader perspective on that, because I'm with you. I don't think it's about the darkness. I think it's about the light, but if we're not willing to understand more broadly what extended consciousness really means, I don't think we have a chance at really turning this thing in any appreciable way. Yeah, you're tapping right on you're in this notion of evil and values and things like that. And one of the things that comes out of the near death experience community is that especially like a life review is they say, well, essentially there is no judgment about what you're doing. Essentially you're judging yourself and you're judging yourself and your behavior based on how it hurts other people. In other words, it's not somebody else applying that. It's like you're feeling their pain, right? Well, if you could actually feel the pain that you're causing other people so that you would go, oh, I don't really want to do that because that's me. I'm hurting myself essentially, it's part of me, right? This other person is really me, it's part of me, you know? Then all of a sudden, if you could taste that, anybody who's had a near death experience, I don't know if anybody who's had a near death experience, it turns into Darth Vader, right? That's not what they do, right? They preach love and joy and the reason is is they've tasted it and they understand, that's why I call it tasting the divine because in that state, people say, well, love is everything. Well, that's pretty hard for us to swallow when we have a hard time even tasting what 1% of that might be like. What if there was infinite intelligence, infinite emotional intelligence, infinite love? It's hard to even talk about that on a Richter scale, you know what I'm saying? That it's exponential amount of love. And so what if people could actually taste that? Well, they would permanently change who they are because they would no longer be interested in abusing and manipulating and other people because they're doing, it's not their motive anymore. So that's our hope, okay, let's put it this way. That's our hope that society will get to the point where it's no longer not only acceptable, but nobody has the taste for it anymore because of that, so. Beautifully said, just beautifully said Doug. What about the myth of progress aspect of it, right? So you're there, you're selling your thing that if we just get this augmented reality with more qubit kind of power, we can get there. There's a Bushman over in Africa who's sitting there and he's just rolling on the ground laughing. He's like, don't you realize it's you're kind of moving in the wrong direction. You think you're progressing and you're not and you're leading to greater potential for it all to be co-opted or not even to take that last part out. It's just that it's not necessary. It's just you're progressing towards what? It's already there, the kingdom is right there. Yeah, absolutely. It's like the Aborigines too, you know, not even the, you know, any shamans or Aborigines, you know, they have a connection with nature and I think we all need to get back to that. And nature is who our higher self is and our bigger self that's outside of space and outside time and that it has the values because it goes, it realizes we're not connected. We're not disconnected, we're connected and that we have these values because they feel good, you know, and they have this, why would we amplify infinite pain if we had a choice to as a higher consciousness state, you know, and unfortunately that's, I think it's, you don't have to choose evil, you just have to choose something else, you know, and that's the thing you choose. I'm with you, again, wonderfully so. That's the whole, that's the whole. Here's what I guess I was driving at with that. I think there's a legitimate case to be made and I think you make it of this technological progress leading towards kind of the counterbalance to what the Bushman is saying, right? So it's like, you're kind of saying, yeah, okay, I respect where you're coming from but I can get there too and I can get there with AI and I can get there with augmented intelligence and all the rest of it. It doesn't have to sit on the sideline necessarily. I think that's part- Yeah, they're not mutually exclusive. Speak to that, if you will. Yeah, see, one of the things that you learn about, especially in this age of polarity, right? It's either this or this, right? They're extreme opposites. As soon as you realize that every advanced concept is neither, they're no opposites anywhere. If you look at the neural model I'm talking about, it's a higher dimensional version. I think if you had a bunch of toothpicks and those are the quantum bits and you can form those toothpicks mathematically into these large pickup sticks or knitting needles, those are the thought vectors of our thoughts and they're these little dimensions assembled to form the bigger ones. Those bigger knitting needles are orthogonal as well, just like quantum computing. They're quantum computing at the macroscopic layer of building all of these thoughts up to be. So that's the law of attraction. The law of attraction is these things that are similar structure look similar at the macroscopic level and every thought is like that. And every one of these thoughts, light and dark, they're not opposites at that domain. They're orthogonal, which means you can have gray. You can have mixtures of everything. So even love and hate, they're not opposites, right? You can do the 20, you can do the loop where you tell everybody to say the opposite of the thing and then you pass it around and the person whispers to the next one. And by the time you get back, you have no idea how it got to where they were because everybody opposite is so context dependent. It's relativistic. So if you start looking at all of that information, you go, okay, the mind is, it all gets back to hyperdimensional, okay? So, and it doesn't exist inside three dimensions. And so there's a value system and meaning comes from that. It's where I was heading with this meaning, law of attraction. Meaning is those values and those emotions. You can't have meaning without emotion. Emotion without meaning is what I was trying to say because emotion is meaning at the fundamental level. That's why people who have these mystical experiences have deep love and they can't even put it in words. It's not words, it's the meaning of love and the meaning of compassion and the meaning of that. They can't even put it in words because there's not enough adjectives to put in front of it to make it that big. And yet they come back and it's, so we have to have a model for how the mind processes meaning and I think this kind of mathematical framework that's built on quantum mechanics and neural mathematics. It's the same kind of mathematics, hyperdimensional mathematics gives you an insight about saying, okay, how that's all that works. And so once you have meaning for compassion and love and you realize, oh, that's who we are, then maybe these uncompassionate things, the hate and the love and the polarity that's coming, none of that means anything anymore if you can get above it, right? That's what you're doing when you're doing an out of body experience. You're above all of your memories, you're kind of like looking above it. NLP calls it timeline therapy where you're above your entire timeline. And that stuff works because you're taking a broader perspective and that broader perspective is a unified view of these what historically look like complimentary or if you have these two things that look like they're opposite of each other but you can take a higher view of it that looks like, oh, I see this broader perspective where those differences disappear. That's what spiritual growth is all about. And that's what you have when you get this divine tasting the divine, you don't have that sort of limited view anymore. You have this much broader unified wholeness that's wave-like. I mean, the only way you can get that broader perspective if you are a wave, not a discrete set of points in, you're not a discrete set of bits. You're like a quantum wave, you're like a quantum potential. And so that's how it ties, neurocomputing ties with quantum mechanics. So Doug, how is the deep reality book going? Is it, do you feel like it's getting through to people? It's just an awesome, awesome book. Again, I super encourage everyone to check it out. How's it going for you and Dr. Tiller and how do you feel about it? Well, Dr. Tiller is organization and him is promoting the book and that's helping. And so we're starting, as a brand new author, Dean Raiden has 50 interviews per month when he has a new book out. And I'm just getting that started with my book as being a first author. So I wanna thank you for inviting me because this is the beginning, I'm hoping the beginning with your interview of other people going, yeah, I have something to say and I probably have something that's unique to be said that's based on science. And yet, gives us hope that we can talk about all of these subjects in a way that's meaningful. So right now it's, I'd say it's slow starting but I'm not worried about that because my goal is that the right people are gonna find out on the book and I've met some very interesting people so far and people who are 100% behind what I'm doing. And that's encouraging. How could it be otherwise? Again, towards the end here, you're just, in my opinion, just knocking it out of the park with the NDE and the good versus in the life review which I always felt is the most important thing to understand about NDE along with the fact that there is a moral imperative and I love your point about, we can always, you know, we are good. My point is always that we are more. We are not biological robots in a meaningless universe. We are this divide ever expanding beings and I'm not Christian, I'm not religious at that street. But also we are good. We are good. We can always choose good. And the fact that so many people choose darkness and evil was just a confusion, misunderstanding. That's their thing that they're gonna have to work on. Just some optimized decision is I like to call it. Some optimized decision. So you are to be congratulated and I love your spirit of, this book will reach the right people. Thank you. However many they are and wherever they are, it's super important that someone with your background and your ability to just directly confront the technology that is so immediately relevant to our life and then do it in a way that is immediately expansive into this metaphysical stuff is, it's a head trip, man. I'm just telling you, you're really to be congratulated. Great work. Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate you inviting me for this interview today and I appreciate all the, obviously you spend a lot of time looking at this book beforehand and I appreciate that too. And so that it's an informed, it's an informed interview. And people will know that's sincere and I appreciate that part of it too. Okay. They're gonna hate on me, but that's okay. Read the book anyway. Thanks again to Dr. Doug Matzky for joining me today on Skeptico. The one question I'd have to tee up from this interview is what do you make of Doug's transition from quantum physics, quantum computing to the metaphysical? To the metaphysical? To the spiritual science? It's a leap, but he claims it's an undeniable leap. What do you think? I'm gonna know your thoughts, jump on over to the Skeptico forum or track me down wherever you can find me. Plenty of shows coming up. Stay with me for all of that. Until next time, take care and bye for now.