Tom Campbell: A Recent Physics Experiment and What it Means to You

Share it with your friends Like

Thanks! Share it with your friends!


In recent news, ANU (Australian National University) physicists carried out an experiment thought out by Princeton physicist John Archibald Wheeler.

Tom discusses the results of this experiment, the impact it has on materialist reductionism, and the implications it has in our lives.

The identity Tom has used for years, and his MBT science supports, is:

R=I. Reality equals information.

Tom’s My Big TOE viewpoint is such that it doesn’t exclude anyone, “Everyone can play this game.”

His science term LCS: “A derivation of an entity that performs the functions of God.” “The root of all existence without the dogma, creed, and beliefs.” ANU Tom’s website Tom’s event and workshop website
Check the future events page for his next workshops.

Interview by Donna Aveni
Edited by Keith Warner


MarkByDay says:

+Tom Campbell
It seems like you are treating us all like quantum particles. You and I, and everyday objects with which we interact daily, do not behave like quantum particles. How to you resolve the Schrodinger's Cat paradox? Maybe I need to fully understand your MBT theory (which admittedly I haven't read)?

Liam Byrne says:

With these objective scientists, It's like trying to take a bare bone from a dog, and trying to point out where some really meaty ones are.

Kristjan Pruus says:


oxiigen says:

but still, i must BELIEVE in double slit experiment..

Deist Revolution says:

+Tom Campbell Surely if this virtual reality theory is correct then that must mean there is an intelligence of some kind, like a creator God? The world religion's are way to primitive to explain this unbelievable revelation, so surely Deism is the only logical option left? Deism is is a theological/philosophical position that combines the rejection of revelation and authority as a source of religious knowledge with the conclusion that reason and observation of the natural world are sufficient to determine the existence of a single creator of the universe.

So it seems like Thomas Paine, George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Elihu Palmer, Max Planck, Voltaire, Antony Flew, James Watt, Wolfgang Pauli, Neil Armstrong, Max Born and many of the old enlightenment thinkers were right! Do you agree?

Matrixitookthe redpil says:

Tom Campbell Thank you so much!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thank you!!!!!!

infinitesimotel says:

Can they really determine definitive light wavelengths… wow? Yes, but inst the diffreaction pattern due to the particles being detected as they disperse their position in a diffraction pattern not a particle changing into a wave?

Richard Watson says:

Hi Tom, i've watched many of your videos and i always enjoy them and i feel intuitively that your theory is correct, however i am a fear based person mainly because i have had to endure a fair amount of trauma during my life time and on top of that i have always been an extremely sensitive person. The reason i'm saying this is because i have heard you mention in previous videos that units of consciousness with zero potential will essentially be deleted, which being of a negative mindset naturally makes me worry about being deleted. So my question to you is, how would you describe a zero potential unit of consciousness?

Thank you for all your work, i don't only take negativity from it; mostly i am greatly comforted and relieved by it.

theZCase says:

Is this somewhat correct? About how the system prevents video lag, like in any virtual reality,

Player asks computer and then the computer responds – during this process and before actualizing anything in the virtual reality (before confirming request from an IUOC), the computer prevents video lag in a virtual reality by, for instance, starting muscles in an arm before raising it.

I mean has this something to do with what I just wrote or am I just imagining things? :)

movieklump says:

The earth existed for over a billion years with just algae. Was the algae's consciousness the only "player"?

Solid Spirit says:

he is that still at first that i didnt think it was a video

Cyber Kurajber says:

This just proves that electrons and photons are not particles but energy gradients!

electron particles? no such nonsense exists.

Nikola Tesla November 1928 interview:
On the whole subject of matter, in fact, Dr. Tesla holds views that are startlingly original.
He disagrees with the accepted atomic theory of matter, and does not believe in the
existence of an “electron” as pictured by science.
“To account for its apparently small mass, science conceives of the electron as a hollow sphere, a sort of bubble,
such a bubble could exist in a medium as a gas or liquid because its internal pressure is not altered by deformation. But if, as supposed, the internal pressure of an electron is due to the repulsion of electric masses, the slightest conceivable deformation must result in the destruction of the bubble! Just to mention another improbability…” – Nikola Tesla
Article: “A Famous Prophet of Science Looks into the Future” (Popular Science Monthly)

“My ideas regarding the electron are at variance with those generally entertained.
I hold that it is a relatively large entity carrying a surface charge and is not an elementary unit (particle).
When the ‘electron’ leaves an electrode of high potential and in a high vacuum it carries an
electrostatic charge many times greater than normal.” – N. Tesla

“In the theoretical treatment of these electrons we are faced with the difficulty that electro-dynamic theory by
itself is unable to give an account of their nature.” “For since electrical masses constituting the electron would
necessarily be scattered under the influence of their mutual repulsions, unless there are forces of another
kind operating between them the nature of which has hitherto remained obscure to us.”
– Einstein on electrons; “Relativity”, by Albert Einstein, Random House Publisher, 1916

“To describe an electron as a negatively charged body is equivalent to saying that it is an expanding-contracting
particle. There is no such condition in nature as a negative charge, nor are there negatively charged particles.
Charge and discharge are opposite conditions, as filling and emptying, or compressing and expanding are opposite
conditions.” – W. Russell

Thomson developed the “Ether Atom” ideas of M. Faraday into his “Electronic Corpuscle”, this indivisible unit.
One corpuscle terminates on one Faradic tube of force, and this quantifies as one Coulomb.
This corpuscle is not and electron, it is a constituent of what today is known incorrectly as an “electron”.
(Thomson relates 1000 corpuscles per electron)
In this view, that taken by W. Crookes, J.J. Thomson, and N. Tesla,
the cathode ray is not electrons, but in actuality corpuscles of the Ether.” – E. Dollard

“There is no rest mass to an ‘electron’.
It is given here the ‘electron’ is no more than a broken loose “hold fast” under the grip of the tensions
within the dielectric lines of force. They are the broken ends of the split in half package of spaghetti.
Obviously this reasoning is not welcome in the realm of Einstein’s Theory of Relativity.” – E. Dollard

“Unfortunately to a large extent in dealing with dielectric fields the prehistoric conception of the
electro-static charge, the ‘electron’, on the conductor still exists, and by its use destroys the analogy between
the two components of the electric field, the magnetic and dielectric. This makes the consideration of
dielectric fields unnecessarily complicated” – C.P. Steinmetz (Electric Discharges, Waves and Impulses)

The idea of electricity as a flow of ‘electrons’ in a conductor was regarded by Oliver Heaviside as “a psychosis”.
This encouraged Heaviside to begin a series of writings

Also consider the J.J. Thomson concept of the "electron" (his own discovery).
Thomson considered the electron the terminal end of one unit line of dielectric induction.

“Electrons as a separate, distinct entity…doesn’t really exist, they are merely bumps in something called a ‘field’.”
– Dr. Steve Biller

You cannot say that stretching a trillion rubber bands nailed to the floor and releasing them or breaking their
“force lines” is the “flow of electrons”; discharge is a terminal movement in systems of inductance or
dielectric capacitance.
There are no discrete particles in the universe and certainly none that mediate
charges, discharges, magnetism, electromagnetism, gravity, and radiation, only fields, all modalities of the Ether.
The so-called ‘electrons’ are not particles, not objects or subjects but are the dynamic principle of discharge,
and are certainly not charge-carriers, fields are not particles, are not “electrons”,
nor assuredly are there energy discharges in the vacuum of space involving ‘electrons’;
the ‘electron’ is a fiction of fallacious observation and an even more faulty mental acuity,
spawned naturally from the minds of materialists, or an Atomist. Electricity is Ether in a state of dynamic
polarization; magnetism is Ether in a state of dynamic circular polarization upon itself, is the radiative
termination of electrical discharge; dielectricity is the Ether under stress or strain.
The motions and strains of the Ether give rise to electrification.
Phi times Psi gives Q; ‘electrons’ do not mediate these electrical and magnetic forces
or their likewise the Ether fields.

Ionut Negru says:

Dear Mr. Tom Campbell,

I have a question regarding the measurement process. Assuming you are colliding a third particle into the second particle from the entangled pair (the one used for measurements) but you don't actually record any of the results, will this count as measurement? and therefore collapse the wave function of the first particle from the entangled pair?

Thank you!

jure nendl says:

In the video, Tom, you mentioned many times that we may be players with a body in the virtual reality and that we do have free will. But i want to know why do you believe that we aren't simply a programmed AI (NPC) within the game that behaves a certain way with some random variables set in. This way the game still needs to check what we actually do before it can send out the data of the result, but it doesn't mean that we are actual players on a server or have an outer conscience. What we could be, is simply a non-interactive simulation watched by an observer.

Open-minded Skeptic says:

Hey Tom, Great video ! Did you find that during your growth in this lifetime that you went through any "spiritual growth spurts," so to speak? I've recently been going through some internal changes that I never thought were going to be possible for me during this lifetime, since I was feeling emotionally blocked for so long in regard to the things I was trying to accomplish on an internal level. As a result of this emotional blockage, I began to feel like this was more of a preparatory lifetime, if you will, for some big growth that would hopefully be happening during my next lifetime. But, man oh man, it's happening to me right now! And I'm a little bit of an emotional wreck about the whole thing. On the one hand, I am really joyful that it is happening. But on the other, it feels a little disconcerting to be this emotionally raw and vulnerable all the time. Any thoughts from you, Tom, or anyone who has gone through something similar? I think it would be helpful. Thanks.

John Smith says:

It seems like the best we can do is to see everything we see with as much love as we can, and allow what is to be.

Thurin Aradan says:

So i guess the constraints of c are upper limits of movement allowed in the sim, but with probability collapse being unconstrained by those limits as part of the shell. E=mc2 is and standard model are sim code

The big bang singularity could have been a 1? If everything is a probability distribution of that 1 then everything 'exists' at close to zero probability, but for us the degrees seem enormous. Would only work if that 1 was somehow only a 1 in its own zero field. Must be something beyond maths, or at least this maths. 1 would make a sort of elegant sense of the pure kind, efficient, saves on clock cycles.

Galaxies make a lot more sense as probability clusters in logarithmic spirals now too, and gravity as a result of the propensity for large numbers to interact with each other.

Rhisiart Gwilym says:

It's true that this Big TOE has a really powerful effect on your feelings about things; especially your feelings about oncoming death when you're in your old age. It's also beautifully exhilarating too, as well as the existential comfort, to start getting these wide, mutually-consistent understandings about how things fit together, through this elegant, occamistic, all-inclusive theoretical structure. Profound thanks, Tom!

Write a comment