Sponsor / Advertiser (13:38)

Let's talk about the thing your business just can't survive without. I go live three days a week at 7am and every morning, you guys. You incredible people out there show up. You're there, you're ready. And if my connection drops in the middle of that live stream, that moment is gone forever. You do not get a second take when it comes to live content. And I know a lot of you

Host (14:01)

are in the same position.

Sponsor / Advertiser (14:02)

Whether you're running live events, processing transactions, or managing a remote team, your business depends on staying connected. Not sometimes. Every time. That's why I trust AT&T business. They're built for business owners who can't afford downtime. AT&T business is a reliable provider for small business owners. For Small Business Month, we celebrate small businesses by helping them run better. This means reliable uptime, easy switching, Smart Communications Impact Theory is powered by AT&T Business built to work work get AT&T business@business.att.com Let's talk about money you're leaving on the table. Every time you pay full price for a health product out of pocket, you could be missing out on 30% savings. There are over 40 million HSA accounts in the US holding $159 billion in pre tax dollars. That's where Trumed comes in. True Med helps qualified customers use pre tax HSA dollars on health products that can qualify as medical expenses under IRS guidelines. You complete a health survey, Trumed handles the documentation and the purchase, and you can save an average of 30% on products like 8 Sleep Peloton, AG1, and others that studies show can treat or reverse many common chronic conditions. Stop paying full price for products your HSA was billed for. Go to trumed.com impact and check out what things you want that may qualify. It takes just a couple of minutes. True Med is for qualified customers only. Hsa, FSA tax savings vary let's talk about the most powerful force in wealth building. Compounding.

Host (15:58)

There is a reason that people have

Sponsor / Advertiser (15:59)

talked about this forever. You put an asset to work, it generates more of itself. Over time, the curve bends way in your favor. Every serious wealth builder knows how compounding works. Most gold owners, though, have completely opted out of it. Monetary Metals changes that equation.

Host (16:18)

They've built a way for your gold

Sponsor / Advertiser (16:20)

to earn yield paid not in dollars but in more physical gold up to 4% per year, more ounces stacking every single month. Compounding in one of the only assets that can't printed, inflated or debased. And storage and insurance are included, by the way.

Host (16:37)

So hidden fees don't eat your yield.

Sponsor / Advertiser (16:39)

The average person is passively absorbing inflation. This is how you compound your way out of it.

Host (16:45)

Click the link in the Show Notes

Sponsor / Advertiser (16:46)

or visit monetary medals.comimpact to learn more. This is a paid advertisement. All right, let's pick up where we left off.

Host (16:59)

All of the possible moves, actions, calculations, and outcomes of a game exist at all times because a game engine only processes the moves and calculations that are required to render what the player needs to see on the screen at that exact moment. Everything else remains in superposition, in the world of possibility and not actuality. When the player's perspective requires an object to exist, then the system resolves it. Not because the player is conscious, but because the system needs the data to know where to place things. The universe appears to operate on identical logic. But as strange as the double slit experiment is, it wasn't enough on its own to prove what was happening. You could still come up with potential explanations, like, maybe there's something about the detector that's physically disturbing the particle. Maybe it's a measurement problem. Maybe we're missing something. Einstein certainly thought so. But people tried things like leaving the detector in place, but turning it on or off. And when it was off, the interference pattern would show up, and when it was on, the interference pattern would disappear again. Then came the experiment that made our actual reality impossible to ignore. In the 1970s, physicist John Archibald Wheeler proposed a brilliant variation of the double slit experiment Called the delayed choice experiment. It was a very difficult experiment to run, so it took decades for someone to pull it off. But once they did, it turned everything upside down. Wheeler asked a simple question. What if you don't decide whether to turn on the detector until after the particle has already passed through the slits? Think about what that's actually asking. The particle has already made its journey. It has already gone through the barrier. It has chosen one slit or the other. Whatever it did, wave or particle, it has already done it. Now after the fact, you decide whether you are watching or not. Does it matter? The crazy thing is, it does. In 2007, physicists at the institut d' optique in France Ran this experiment with the precision required to actually test it. The result was unambiguous. When the researchers turned on the detector after the particle had already passed through the slits, it retroactively behaved like a particle when passing through the slits. When they chose not to observe it, it retroactively behaved like a wave when passing through the slits. The decision made after the fact Determined what the particle had done before the fact. The present detection somehow reached back in time and changed the past. There is no locally real mechanical explanation for that. There's no story about detectors physically disturbing particles. That accounts for a decision made after the particle already traveled through the barrier. The only thing that changed was whether the particle was monitored or not, and thus whether the system was forced to fully render the particle or not. And the particle's history changes accordingly retroactively. While realism and locality can't exist in the face of this reality, if you assume we're inside of a simulation or a game engine, it suddenly all makes perfect sense. A simulation doesn't have a static past. It simply has mathematical probabilities that are only run when you need to determine where everything should be right now, in this moment. When processed, these probabilities collapse into a definitive solution that reaches back into the simulated past to say, well, if I've ended up in this state here where you're measuring me, that means I must have done these things in the past, and it suddenly makes those things true. That is how the actual universe works. It only runs the computations that are necessary to describe the current thing that is being monitored by some element of the system. And if it has to reach into the past to define things there, it will do so. But there's still a missing piece of the puzzle. So far, we have particles behaving strangely in isolation. We have an observation collapsing wave functions. We have the past taking concrete shape only when it's necessary to establish the present aspect that the universe needs to render in this moment. What we don't have is proof that the universe isn't actually physical. To get all the way to this being plausibly a simulation, we have to prove that distant objects can be processed causally together instantly, despite being radically far apart. I'm talking like opposite ends of the universe, far apart. Something that would only happen if the distance was actually an illusion. So strap in, because things are about to get really weird. Welcome to part three, the Nobel Prize. In 1935, Einstein wrote a paper designed to prove that quantum mechanics was incomplete. He wasn't arguing the experiments were wrong. He accepted the data. What he refused to accept was the interpretation. His position was that particles had to have definite properties before they were measured. He insisted that reality existed in independently of observation and that quantum mechanics simply hadn't found the hidden variables yet. The full picture was out there. We just didn't have it. To make his case, Einstein and two colleagues, Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen, designed a thought experiment. It became known as the EPR paradox. It went like this. Quantum mechanics predicts that two particles can become entangled, meaning their properties are linked. If you measure one, you instantly know something about the other, no matter how far apart they are. And the relationship between the two is causal. If one is spinning one way because of the laws of physics, the other must be spinning in the other direction. Einstein said that was absurd. For that to work, either the particles had some kind of hidden agreement baked in from the start. Predetermined instructions that told each one how to behave. Or measuring one particle would somehow send information to the other faster than the speed of light. The first option meant quantum mechanics was incomplete. The second option violated special relativity, which Einstein also invented and was definitely not about to abandon. It just explained too much. His conclusion there had to be some hidden variables, reality had to be locally real. The alternative was just too insane to accept. For nearly 30 years, no one could prove him right or wrong. It was a philosophical standoff. Then, in 1964, a physicist named John Bell published a paper with a key insight. Bell had figured out how to turn Einstein's philosophical argument into a testable mathematical prediction. He proved that if hidden variables existed, if particles really did carry predetermined instructions, then measurements taken on entangled pairs would only correlate up to a specific statistical threshold. He called it a Bell inequality. It was a hard ceiling on how correlated two particles could be if they were just following pre written rules. If experiments found correlations above that ceiling, hidden variables were dead. They just couldn't be true, and Einstein would be wrong and the universe would definitively not be locally real. John Clauser ran the first real test in 1972 out of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. He fired entangled pairs of photons at detectors on opposite sides of a room and measured their correlations. The Bell inequality was violated. The correlations were too strong. No hidden instructions could explain it. But there were loopholes. Maybe the detectors were influencing each other. Maybe there was something subtle being missed. So physicists got to work. Alan Aspect closed the most important loophole. In the 1980s, he designed an experiment where the measurement settings were switched after the entangled photons had already left their source in billionths of a second. Way too fast for a signal to pass between them. Too fast for any pre written instructions to account for the change. The Bell inequality was violated again. Anton Zellinger went even further. In 2017, his team used light emitted by stars hundreds of light years away to randomly set the measurement parameters of the experiment. The logic was airtight. If some hidden cosmic conspiracy was faking entanglement, it would have needed to be set in motion before those stars emitted that light. Centuries before anyone designed this test, before Einstein was even born, didn't matter. The Bell inequality was still violated. In October of 2022, Aspect, Clauser and Zellinger were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics for this body of work. The official citation was for experiments with entangled photons, establishing the violation of Bell inequalities and pioneering quantum information science. Scientific American ran the headline the universe is not locally real. And the physics Nobel Prize winners proved it, hopefully this far in. You guys see that? That's not flowery language. That's the conclusion of the most rigorous experimental physics of the last 50 years. The universe is not locally real. But what does that actually mean? Well, it means Einstein was wrong. Particles do not carry hidden, predetermined instructions. There is no pre written scripts that makes it possible for distant objects to appear to be causally affecting one another. Instead, objects do not have definite properties before they're measured. And entangled particles, no matter how far apart they are, are not two separate things that happen to behave similarly. They're one system. Measuring one instantaneously determines causally the state of the other, not because a signal traveled between them, but because they were never truly separate objects to begin with. Distance, as it turns out, is an illusion, which is exactly what every game developer knows about their game. In a game engine, two objects on opposite sides of the world are not really separate. They're data structures processed in the same place, governed by the same system. As we were talking about before, the distance between them is just a representation on the screen underneath. The system has access to everything at once. It's all connected. There's no actual separation. There's no true locality. It's not real. It's just a unified computational system rendering the appearance of distance and objects. No one can say definitively that our universe is a simulation, but we can say that that it behaves exactly like a simulation. Objects appear real on screen, distance appears real on screen. But underneath the visual layer of reality, at the quantum level, where the actual rules live, separation is merely simulated. Entangled particles on opposite ends of the universe are not communicating across distance. They're being processed together by a centralized system whenever observation requires it. That's what it means to not be locally real. The universe has no true locality because it's all being processed in the same place. And it's not true realism, because nothing has a definite state until the system needs to render it. Those are not the properties of a physical universe sitting out there waiting to be discovered. Those are the properties of a simulation that remains energy efficient by processing only what is required moment to moment. So welcome to part four. The universe is much cooler than you think. Elon Musk has said publicly that the odds we're living in base reality are about one in a billion. In 2003, Oxford philosopher Nick Bostrom explained

Sponsor / Advertiser (29:13)

why we have computers in the external world, that those computers are getting faster and better with passing time.

Host (29:19)

Bostrom started with a single Computing power has roughly doubled every two years for decades. If that trend continues, or even if it slows down dramatically, eventually future civilizations will eventually be capable of running simulations of entire worlds, complete with conscious inhabitants who mistake the simulation for base reality. If that's true, he argued, then one of three things must be the case. Option 1. Virtually every civilization destroys itself before reaching that capability. Some catastrophic ceiling of some kind, war, pandemic, rogue AI, whatever, it ends the game before it gets there. Every time, everywhere in the universe, without exception, virtually every civilization that does reach that capability chooses never to run simulations. Some universal constraint stops them. Every advanced civilization ever, indefinitely. Option three. We're almost certainly living in a simulation right now, because the math is brutal. If even one civilization survives and runs even a modest number of simulations, they're going to produce vastly more simulated realities than base realities. The math goes something like if advanced civilizations can run a simulation, they are likely to run many of them. Here, in our own reality, we run simulations of everything from traffic to weather. So our own trajectory suggests an advanced civilization would inevitably run potentially millions of simulations. Within those simulations, the actors inside will build simulations until it's simulations all the way down. In the face of that, the probability of any conscious mind existing in base reality becomes vanishingly small. The ratio isn't even close. The probability that you exist in the one base reality, out of all the possible places a conscious mind could find itself, approaches zero. The crazy part is that Bostrom laid out that argument before the Nobel Prize was given for proving that our universe operates on the same computational system that a simulation would require. He was just working from pure probability. It's so wild that physics then came along after and proved that the structure of the universe makes this hypothesis even more likely. Here's where all of this leaves us. Either we live inside of a simulation built by some intelligence operating at a level that is way above our own, or the universe is so fundamentally computational in its nature that the distinction between a simulation and how our universe actually operates just disappears. So maybe this isn't technically a simulation, but at some point, does it really even matter? There's no structural difference that we can discern between the two. At this point, the reality at its base layer isn't matter and energy. It's mathematics, calculation, and information processing itself. Either way, the universe we're taught to believe in is gone. It never existed. In its place is something far more extraordinary. A reality that renders on demand, where distance and many other things are just illusions, where nothing is definite until the system needs it to be, where the past resolves itself backward from the present. To me, all of this is thrilling. Think of all the insane things that are possible inside of a video game that we currently think of in reality as impossible. Well before Einstein's discoveries, the entire atomic age would have seemed impossible. It would have seemed like magic. But now it's just our common reality. So the question becomes, if this is a simulation, what things will be possible in our future that currently seem like magic?

Sponsor / Advertiser (33:03)

All right, that's it for today's episode. If you got value out of this,

Host (33:06)

it would mean the world to me

Sponsor / Advertiser (33:08)

if you would go give us a five star rating.

Host (33:11)

It helps more than you know. All right, thank you and until next time, my friends. Be legendary. Take care. Peace. Let's talk about a pattern that is

Sponsor / Advertiser (33:19)

guaranteed to be killing your progress.

Host (33:21)

You know what you need to do? You need consistent nutrition. We all do. You need vitamins, probiotics, greens. We all know that we should be

Sponsor / Advertiser (33:29)

doing more of it.

Host (33:30)

When your morning gets chaotic, you skip it. When you travel, you skip it. When your routine breaks, breaks, everything tends to break. And that inconsistency compounds against you every single day. AG1 is designed to solve the execution problem. One scoop, eight ounces of water and you're done. You're getting 75 plus ingredients, vitamins and minerals, pre and probiotics, nutrient dense superfoods. Everything that used to require six, seven different supplements and perfect planning now happens in one drink that takes about 30 seconds to make. Right now, AG1 is giving you $87 worth of free gifts with your first subscript description. You get a welcome kit, Travel packs, vitamin D3 plus K2 and flavor samples. Click the link in the show notes or visit drinkag1.comimpact to claim this offer. I sold my car in Carvana last night. Well, that's cool.

Guest / Family Member (34:23)

No, you don't understand. It went perfectly. Real offer down to the penny. They're picking it up tomorrow. Nothing went wrong.

Mom / Carvana Advertiser (34:29)

So what's the problem?

Guest / Family Member (34:31)

That is the problem. Nothing in my life goes to smoothly. I'm waiting for the catch.

Mom / Carvana Advertiser (34:34)

Maybe there's no catch.

Host (34:36)

That's exactly what a catch would want me to think.

Mom / Carvana Advertiser (34:39)

Wow. You need to relax.

Guest / Family Member (34:40)

I need a knock on wood.

Host (34:41)

Do we have. What is this table wood?

Mom / Carvana Advertiser (34:42)

I think it's laminate.

Guest / Family Member (34:43)

Okay.

Host (34:44)

Yeah, that's good.

Guest / Family Member (34:44)

That's close enough.

Mom / Carvana Advertiser (34:45)

Car selling without a catch. Sell your car today on Carvana. Pick up fees may apply.