New research on Quantum Birthmarks may help partly explain the Mandela Effect

[u/Ok_Good_4099]

Quantum Birthmarks: Ergodicity Breaking Beyond Scarring | Phys. Rev. X

This is confusing stuff, but if our brains are 'quantum machines' like some have suggested, and our timelines changed, we /may/ retain memories from the original timelines similar to how the universe retains 'memories' of changing quantum states.

Does that make sense? What do you all think? All the people remembering the different history before it really was changed to our current history. Our 'false' memories are in fact the 'Quantum Birthmarks'.

[u/Mr-Cantaloupe]

Fun paper, not gonna lie, but a quantum birthmark just means a tiny particle never fully forgets where it started. It remembers its real past, not some different one. If anything it points back to what actually happened, not a different timeline.

It also only works when the particle is totally cut off from everything, which is why the researchers used one particle bouncing around in a box. Our brains are warm, wet, and busy, so those fragile quantum states fall apart way too fast in there to hold a memory.

We also already have a simpler answer for the Mandela Effect. Memory isn't a perfect recording, your brain fills in gaps with what feels familiar. For example, tons of people remember "Berenstein" because "stein" is way more common in last names than "stain”

[u/__HummBug__ → u/Mr-Cantaloupe]

I remember Berenstein because I used one of the books while teaching my children how to read. I wasn't sure how to pronounce the name since "ei" could potentially be pronounced with a long E or with a long A. I decided to go with a long E sound but told my twins that I didn't know for sure how the name was pronounced and showed them words that used "ei" to represent both the long E and the long A sound (including "eigh"). So we called them the Berenstein (like ee) Bears. I didn't find out until very recently that it's not only spelled with an "ai" but pronounced with a long A. I could see misremembering how a word was spelled, but I wouldn't have pronounced it with a long E if it had been spelled "ai." It wouldn't have even crossed my mind to do so. And I doubt I would have found any examples of "ai" being used to represent the long E sound even if it had crossed my mind. I would have just automatically pronounced it with a long A. It just isn't logical to believe that the book I held contained the Berenstain spelling. I have yet to find a logical (and supported) explanation, but I'm certain that the book I read with my children was spelled Berenstein.

[u/littlelupie → u/__HummBug__]

The explanation is that human memory is EXTREMELY fallible and it's very easy for memories to change. And of course you wouldn't know they were changing because they were your memories. 

[u/Plus-Bus-6937 → u/__HummBug__]

I agree with you. I have a memory from childhood where I was at a neighbor's house and he was playing the Berenstein Bears Sega Genesis video game or one of them. I distinctly remember sitting there and spelling out the name and it was spelled with 3 E's, the last name that is. If it was spelled with 2 E's and an A, I would've remembered that moment completely different. I know what I remember. I tend to think memory is actually pretty reliable for many people.

[u/Juxtapoe → u/Mr-Cantaloupe]

Now that we have quantum computers and so much progress with constructor theory I think it is an outdated way of thinking to try to cling to the standard model to explain quantum effects.

Yes WE need to highly control an environment to scientifically observe quantum entanglement, however, to believe that only those quantumly entangled states exist that we can directly observe is like a toddler believing a ball disappears when it is behind somebody's back.

At this point it has already been demonstrated that the long held assumption/belief that reality is locally real (in other words that there is an objective reality that persists in a precise State regardless of your choice on how to measure it) has been experimentally falsified.

Clinging to that way of thinking is unscientific and dogmatic at this point.

[u/Glaurung86]

There's zero evidence for other timelines.

MEs are just collective false memories.

[u/Fantastic-Band-5082 → u/Glaurung86]

It's getting silly here now...

[u/MandelaEffect-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Hello subscriber! Unfortunately, your post/comment was removed because it violates Rule 6: Be civil. Do not disrespect, insult, or attack others.

[u/Spikeybear]

This article really has nothing to do with this sub. It's more so talking about quantum systems not erasing the statistical influence of how they began.

Imagine bouncing a cue ball around a pool table for a billion years. Eventually you may not be able to figure out where the ball first made contact with the tables sides. The paper suggests that in quantum systems its still possible to infer something about where the system began. Even after an incredibly long time

[u/MrPlaney]

There are no other timelines that are switching, or exchanging information. The exact same cause you are claiming, (quantum mechanics), forbids timelines from interacting with each other, and that’s if they do exist.

[u/Draper-Wood-758]

Unfortunately, the information is too long for me, and didn't read or try to understand, because my vocabulary is simplistic for clear understanding, and struggled to understand the information of the article.

I don't think that quantum mechanics as explained in the article explains the Mandela Effect.

[u/a_real_observer → u/Draper-Wood-758]

Dude, you look like a top-commenter spreading their "memory failure" nonsense. If you did not read nor understand what's explained there, why are you concluding it's not that what causes the ME?

[u/MrPlaney → u/a_real_observer]

Possibly because the ME is caused by false memories, not memory failure. The article in question has nothing to do with human memory.

[u/Draper-Wood-758 → u/a_real_observer]

There's actually a difference between memory failure (a memory that doesn't work or fails to operate) and a mistaken memory, like a memory that makes a mistake of what is possible was the case when the case would've just been what the official narrative says about such certain things, depending on the certain thing the memory "projects" to look like the case of the certain thing.

I don't deny all Mandela Effects, besides some Mandela Effects which I don't consider as "Mandela Effects" verbally and personally speaking when it comes to something I'm certain or paid attention to that I have personal knowledge (no examples I don't think I need to give, besides Bible verses, may be very unrelated).

I often doubt other Mandela Effects, things that are possible were most likely misread, misheard, or looked differently off in the distance from a mile away, simply may have not paid much attention to those things, causing the memory to make a mistake about certain things.

[u/BigMack6911]

You know what's insane. There are things I remember from growing up, like watching things with my family and they dont remember it. Im the youngest in my family and there were things in the 80s i remember that I found out were ME's and its like my mom or sister didnt even know about. Its like im adopted or something

[u/Toebeens89]

Quantum Birthmark would essentially just further explain why you explicitly would know the timeline your quantum system is from, that is it’s own decohered timeline at that point. You would have a clear recollection from what looks like A to B to you but is still just going from A that possibly branched to A1 and A2.

The biggest issue is every other quantum system that was entangled has no explanation or logic as to how they wouldn’t also have branched or detangled itself. There is a plethora of issues to work through if you want to talk about going from a timeline that splits into two decohered branches of opposite states or outcomes, let alone one preexisting timeline to another like A to B — that we couldn’t even begin to account for. Not saying it’s impossible (though our current understanding of the laws of quantum physics does, explicitly) but very improbable.

[u/ThePaineOne]

Or, hear me out: we misremember shit and sometimes lots of people misremember shit the same way because we have brains that all function basically the same way.

[u/Top-Confidence4496]

Maybe but I'm not smart enough to read that paper

[u/a_real_observer]

I prefer plain and simple relational quantum mechanics vocabulary, it's much straightforward, but ok, this is compatible with it. In fact, it seems just another perspective for the "cross-links" that were formerly defined in RQM recently IMHO.