Light, Help and Quantum Mechanics

Send us a text

Light, Help and Quantum Mechanics

Considering society Wednesday, May 14, 2025.

Podcast # 86

The Consider Podcast

Examining Today's Wisdom, Folly and Madness

www.consider.info

www.consider.info

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
The cultural corner is ahead, Time to contemplate
culture and society.
Titus 1, 12-13 Even one oftheir own prophets has said
Cretans are always liars, evilbrutes, lazy gluttons.
This testimony is true.

(00:26):
Therefore, rebuke them sharplyso that they will be sound in
the faith.
The Consider Podcast Examiningtoday's wisdom wwwconsiderinfo.

Speaker 3 (00:48):
Before we get started , quick question, Jacob.
Simple and easy this morning.
Here's the question Do photonsexperience time?

Speaker 4 (00:59):
Welcome to the Consider Podcast, where we
examine today's wisdom, follyand madness.
Consider podcast, where weexamine today's wisdom, folly
and madness.
More information can be foundat wwwconsiderinfo.
Now here are your hosts,timothy and Jacob.

Speaker 3 (01:18):
How's it going, Jacob ?
It's going good.

Speaker 5 (01:31):
So do photons experience time.

Speaker 3 (01:31):
I'm going to say, yes , they do.
Photons experience time.
I'm gonna say, yes, they do,they experience time.
Yes, everything, everythingexperiences time.

Speaker 5 (01:35):
Really, even even heaven experiences time no,
except, except the lord,although although, well he,
there's some sort of time.
If he's always been, if he'sbeen from the beginning, then it
doesn't affect him, but he does.
Well, he just knows it's there.
It doesn't affect him though.

Speaker 3 (01:53):
We can go all the way to.
Well, technically, god is abovetime because he's God and he's
above time, correct?

Speaker 2 (01:59):
Is there time in heaven.

Speaker 3 (02:01):
Well, in the book of Revelation it says that there's
a tree for the healing of thenations that gives its fruit
every 30 days.
So I guess you'd be markingyour calendar in heaven, but
we're getting a little off topic.
But that was a good place to go.
What we're going to talk, well,let's go ahead and play it.
This is, uh, neil degrassi, ifI'm pronouncing his name

(02:22):
correctly.
They're discussing photons andwhether they experience time or
not.

Speaker 6 (02:29):
Remember Einstein the faster you go, slower time
ticks for you.
Correct At the speed of light,time stops.
Are you saying?
Photons don't experience timeat all?
Holy crap.
So the instant the photon wascreated in photosphere of the
sun, the outer surface, and thenit went on its eight minute and
20 second journey to earth?
If you're the photon, you areborn and you land on someone's

(02:51):
buttocks in the same moment.
Oh snap, they have no conceptof that time passing.
You were born and absorbed inthe same instant.

Speaker 5 (03:00):
Okay, Jacob, you got it Kind of got it.
Well, I got his words.
He says that it doesn'texperience time.

Speaker 3 (03:09):
Correct.
Yeah, all of this we've got totake by faith that the science
is correct.
Yes, but his main point is thatphotons when the minute that
it's created and wherever itwinds up at, which could be, you
know, on Earth I won't use hislanguage or across the galaxies
or whatever.
It's instantaneous that thereis no time element going on

(03:32):
there, correct?

Speaker 5 (03:33):
Yeah Well, he even referenced like it takes eight
minutes and something secondsfor the photon to get here.

Speaker 3 (03:38):
So he even references a time but the photon didn't
experience the time a time, butthe photon didn't experience the
time exactly, which brings up areally good point of where
we're headed with this that thephoton is not experiencing any
time whatsoever, but from ourperspective, we're measuring the
time.
Yes, all right, here's, here'sthe point.
Let's go to first john, chapterone, verse five.

(04:01):
Go ahead and read that, jacob 1.

Speaker 5 (04:03):
John, chapter 1, verse 5.

Speaker 3 (04:08):
Clearly we're not as fast as a photon.

Speaker 5 (04:11):
Yes, this is the message we have heard from him
and declared to you.
God is light In him.
There is no darkness at all.

Speaker 3 (04:21):
Okay, what he just proved is, if God is light and
if you're going the speed oflight, or actually beyond, let's
just say, is there anyexperience of time?
No, not according to him, so hejust proved Scripture true, yes,
and one thing to kind ofcontemplate here a little bit or

(04:42):
consider is the fact thateventually he's going to say,
we'll play the clip that therereally is no god.
And yet you've got all thesefantastic theories.
In fact, as far as I know, Idon't know how they're proving a
photon doesn't experience time.
I take their word for it.
It has a real ring of truth toit.
It shows, you know, god islight.
Therefore there is no time tohim.

(05:03):
Correct, correct, in fact itkind of gets a.
Obviously, you would know itwould get deeper and deeper.
In that.
Go to psalm 36, verse 9.
I'd like to say this is one ofmy favorite scriptures, but it's
kind of a misnomer my favoritescriptures, or whatever.
God's kind of putting my hearton my heart at the moment.
Although we were kind ofcalculating, I've got a picture

(05:26):
in my office that I've had forhow many years did we come up
with?
Like 32 or something.

Speaker 5 (05:32):
A solid 35.
Our best guess is 1990 is aboutwhen you got it, and that's 35
years, so a very long time.

Speaker 3 (05:41):
It's kind of interesting that we're talking
about.
God is light, therefore time isirrelevant.
And then I'm talking about oneof the favorite scriptures is
that the light of God which I'vehad for 36 years, which I've
counted down, so quite thecontrast in a lot of ways.
Psalm 36, 9, it really, I wouldhave to say, is one of my
favorite scriptures, for withyou is the fountain of life All

(06:06):
right, say is one of my favoritescriptures, for with you is the
fountain of life, all right.
So he's talking about protons.
Remember that when it's created, which means you've got life
going on, that it's instantlywherever it needs to be.
That's, that's kind of whathe's saying, right?
You know, I don't want to putwords in these guys mouths and
this stuff.
A lot of it's over my head, awhole lot, and in fact I'm going
to ask you a series ofquestions, jacob, that I kind of
apologize for, because there'sno way that you had advanced

(06:29):
warning.
I've at least been able to mullover these videos, so I have
maybe a grasp.
That's correct, sure, but Iappreciate you letting me bounce
off the questions from youwithout defensiveness.
There's none of that.
When you were an early disciple, I'd ask questions just to
break your pride, but yououtgrew that which is really
testimony to God's grace andpower.
Something you wanted to say.

Speaker 5 (06:50):
No, no, go ahead.

Speaker 3 (06:51):
Psalm 36, 9, says For with you is the fountain of
life.
And here's my favorite part,and I have that engraved on the
painting or the poster, whateverit is, in your light, we see
light.
Or the poster, whatever it is,in your light, we see light.
It says and we don't have timeto look at today that God lives
in unapproachable light.
And when we say light we tendto think only of what we can see

(07:13):
visually.
But there are all kinds ofdifferent levels and different
kinds of light that we cannotobserve.
We can maybe see some thingsthat happen in life that say,
okay, that's there, you can'tsee an x-ray, but you can see
the.
The plate of an x-ray.
That kind of proves, well,clearly, something was there.
It's that kind of concept.
So we have to have the light ofgod to understand light.

(07:37):
And that's what neil doesn'thave.
He rejects that there's a godand we'll look at that here in a
moment.
So he's not able to understandand really understand the
significance of what he'slooking at, and that's really
sad.
Any comments before we kind ofgo to this next scripture on
that, jacob, no, go ahead.
Well, let's go to Genesis 1,verse 3, because there's always

(08:00):
been this big debate going on ofwell, the earth wasn't made in
24 days.
And yet in Genesis it says you,you know, let there be light,
and that was the first day.
And so it goes on in the kidssongs and unbelievers really,
they have many cows over thiswhole issue saying see the
bible's wrong.
I find that argument,especially now frustrating is

(08:24):
the wrong word, but so empty interms of logic.
I mean, here you have scientiststalking about photons that can
be in two different places atthe same time and you have
quantum theory.
We're going to look at someomega code that the
supercomputer just came up with.
You've got all these dimensionsgoing on and all this weird
kind of thing.

(08:44):
That does make sense, but it'sreally way out there, right?
And yet you can't imagine a Godthat, if he wanted to, could
make the earth and all that wesee in 24-hour segments.
Now, scripture doesn't even saythat and I don't believe it was
24 hours.
But just consider the photonfor a moment.
The photon is created, right?

(09:05):
And the instant it's created,is it not landing instantly
where it's supposed to be, jacob, without any sense of time?

Speaker 5 (09:12):
Correct.
And, yep, we're taking NeildeGrasse Tyson at his word.
But, yes, the photo poopemerges from the sun and then
poof, it's at the earth, with noexperience of time, all right,
so it's not way out there toenvision.

Speaker 3 (09:26):
God says okay, here's earth.
Just pretend earth is onelittle photon, or it's obviously
made up a bunch of photons.
God says let it be created.
Would it not instantly be inplace where it's supposed to be
Correct?
So there's no movement or senseof time.

Speaker 8 (09:42):
It literally could be .

Speaker 3 (09:43):
God made it in an instant and waited 23 hours and
59 seconds to do the next dayright correct.
So I don't know why that's allso strange anymore.
There should really be a fullembracing by all scientists
saying well, yeah, it's possible.
I mean, they have all kinds ofbizarre things going on, so why
not that that's easy to linewith science.
Is all that I'm saying Correct?

(10:04):
Yeah, let me do a little bit ofreading and explain this a
little bit.
Scientists really do believethat there's a phenomenon where
particles can exist in twodifferent places at the same

(10:24):
time.
So let me read a recap of thatand I'm not going to try and
explain the whole thing.
Okay, the phenomenon whereparticles exist in two places at
once is primarily associatedwith quantum mechanics.
Have you heard that term,quantum mechanics, jake?

Speaker 5 (10:36):
Yes, I have heard that term.

Speaker 3 (10:38):
Okay, that's going to become very important as we
look at something else here in alittle bit about the quantum
computer, as we look atsomething else here in a little
bit about the quantum computerand it's called.
It goes on to say particularlythe concept of superposition.
Superposition in quantummechanics particles such as
electrons can exist in multiplestates or locations

(10:58):
simultaneously until they aremeasured.
Now that's the weird part.
In other words, you've got twopart.
You've got particles right,existing in multiple states at
the same time, but then when yougo to look to measure them it
disappears.
That that's the part I quitedon't quite have down, but I'm
not really trying to pursue that.

(11:19):
Okay, what this goes on to.
This means that a particle canbe described as being in a
combination of all possiblestates.
So you think of who God is.
God is light.
Can he not exist in allpossible states at all times,
instantaneously?
Yes, he can.

(11:40):
And then if we back up fromthat, we know that to be true.
And so if we back up to observeGod, are we able to do so?
Not as humans Correct so thisquantum superposition applies to
God himself, correct?
He is everywhere, at alldifferent levels.

(12:00):
All these protons, electrons,everything are everywhere where
they need to be.
Different levels, all theseprotons, electrons, everything
are everywhere where they needto be.
But if you back up and go toexamine them, then that which
you're looking at disappears.
So the same thing with God.
We all know God says he'seternal.
So okay, we accept that.
We kind of see proof of allthat around.
But if we back up and go I'mgoing to go into, let's say I go
into my prayer closet and go,okay, I'm going to observe God

(12:25):
eternally, in all states, at alltimes, it would elude me, it
would disappear.
Right, I'm not able to grasp it, put it down, because the
minute you nail it down, so tospeak, or the minute you hold
God to the mat, it disappears,the concept disappears.
Make sense, it does make sense,okay.
In Genesis 1-3, it says and Godsaid Let there be light.

(12:50):
And there was light.
Now, does that seem so far outthere that Neil should go?
Well, I don't know about that?

Speaker 5 (12:57):
No, it doesn't seem that out there, to me Not at all
.

Speaker 3 (13:00):
God saw that the light was good and he separated
the light from darkness.
God called the light day andthe darkness he called night and
there was evening and there wasmorning, the first day.
Again, even scripture says in 1Peter that this is God's day,
it's not man's day.
Have you ever noticed withthese scientists?
They have these supermathematical formulas right and

(13:22):
they'll come up.
You know quantum mechanics,quantum computing, superimposing
.
You know they have all thesenames, these photons, electrons,
and then when they go, somebodywill go.
Can you explain that to a layman?
What do they do?
They bring it down to some ofthe most basic concept to
explain the most complicatedthings.

(13:43):
Well, god is no different.
He's talking to the human race.
Do you think he's going to layout the mathematical formula by
which all of this is true?
First of all, I kind of thankhim for that.
Doesn't it leave us somethingto explore?
Yes, can you imagine?
The Bible lays out this formulaand I'm going to guess it's
probably a pretty simple formula.

(14:04):
I mean, I don't know by whichthe universe was created, and if
he spelled that out right?
Yeah, this is how it was done.
There's no fun in theexamination.

Speaker 5 (14:16):
Well, it takes away like the mystery.
And then, yeah, because hewants a relationship with us, he
wants us to, you know, not onlymarvel at his creation, but
obviously worship him.
And so, if you just spell itout, it's like reading the book
and then just being done Like,okay, go on to something else.

Speaker 3 (14:35):
Yeah, it's like a child comes to you right and
they go I don't know, daddy, whyare red crayons red?
And you go, because the dyefunctions into the wax and it
comes out.
And you go because the dyefunctions into the wax and it
comes out, and you spell it outin this cold level.
Is there much reaction with thekid other than okay, yeah,
correct.
But if you said something like,well, the Ls in the tree, they

(14:56):
take the wax from the tree andthey mix it with sunlight and it
comes out red.
I'm not advocating that kind ofexplanation.
Sure, and it comes out red.
I'm not advocating that kind ofexplanation.
But there's an enjoyment offellowship and I think you hit
that right on the nail on thehead that what God's looking for
is fellowship.
So he comes along and he wordsit this way, and then, as you
mature, as you grow in the Lord,you go hmm, well, hey, wait a

(15:19):
minute, Can you explain the dayto me as you grow in other
things?
And that's why we're referredto as children or sheep that
have to be shepherded.
Eventually we get around toasking some other questions, but
he's just trying to give a funintroduction to the creation of
the universe.
I find this to be a lot morefun than Neil's little photon
experiment.
Right, Correct, yes, All right,Any comments or anything,

(15:49):
Because we're going to play thisnext clip now, where Neil goes
on to say he doesn't believe inGod.

Speaker 6 (15:52):
Do you believe in God , me, the creator?
Yeah, so the more I look at theuniverse, just the less
convinced I am that there issomething benevolent going on.
So if your concept of a creatoris someone who's all powerful
and all good, that's not anuncommon pairing of powers that
you might describe to a creator.
And I look at disasters thatafflict Earth and life on Earth

(16:13):
Volcanoes, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, disease.
You look at this list of waysthat life is made miserable on
Earth by natural causes, and Ijust ask how do you deal with
that?
So philosophers rose up andsaid if there is a God, god is
either not all powerful or notall good.

(16:33):
I have no problems if, as weprobe the origins of things, we
bump up into the bearded man.
If that shows up, we're good togo.
Okay, not a problem.
There's just no evidence of it,and this is why religions are
called faiths.

Speaker 3 (16:47):
Any?
Okay, I'm trying not to laughat this, but any quick comment,
jacob.

Speaker 5 (16:54):
Well, the world was.
God called it good and it wasonly because sin entered the
world through man.
I mean, there was no, you know,there wasn't like there was
hurricanes and disease and allthe bad stuff till man sinned.
So anyways, it's kind of aquick explanation of why there's
bad things that happen.

Speaker 3 (17:11):
Well, we're going to get to that here in just a
moment, because that's kind ofthe crux of the deal, so let me
back up.
Did he actually answer thequestion?

Speaker 5 (17:20):
Well, he yeah, well, her question is do you believe
in God or a creator?
And his answer is no.
So he answered that part of thequestion Not really, Not really
Did.
He answered that part of thequestion Not really, not really
Did he really address thequestion of is there a God?
Oh well, then he proceeded totheorize like that if there's a

(17:44):
God, pretty much that he doesn'tlike it, right, he doesn't like
the fact that there's disease,there's disasters and all this
stuff, the fact that there'sdisease, there's disasters and
all this stuff, and so then itwill.
And then he claims, I think Ibelieve at the end he pretty
much says like there is noevidence for god, but that's his
opinion.

Speaker 3 (17:59):
Well, we'll get that to that in a moment.
He never answered the questionthese scientists never do when,
when?
Because it's a simple question.
She didn't ask well, what doyou think about the character of
God?
Sure, she asked do you believein God?
And most of these atheists oragnostics, or especially those

(18:19):
that are outspoken, they neveranswer that question.
What they always answer is thatthe character of God is bad,
yeah, and that somehow thatnegates the fact that there ever
was a god oh sure, those aretwo separate issues, correct?

Speaker 5 (18:35):
yeah, that's true, they.
Yeah, he always goes into everywell.
You know, it's almost like well, if there was a god.
To me he looks bad.
Therefore, I won't believe inhim that is correct, and he's
not.

Speaker 3 (18:46):
And think of it as this scientific mind he's got
and he's not able to separatethat question, as we'll see here
in a moment.
That's why scripture says theybecome fools because he can't
even he separates protons interms of when they exist and
that they're in all states atall times, and that's not a
problem for him.
So if you say, hey, do dophotons experience time, and he

(19:08):
goes no, no, the faster you getto the speed of light, time
becomes meaningless and it stopsand so on.
Okay, that's a fact.
He answered the question.
The question was does theproton experience time?
No, is there a god?
That's a yes or no question.
Yeah, and the people alwayslistening I don't know what
their problem is.
They let them get by with it,like Like I would go no, that's

(19:30):
not the question.
First, answer the question Doyou think there's a God or not?
If he says yes, I think there'sa God, then we can talk about.
Okay now which God and whydon't you like his character?
First of all, it's ridiculous.
I mean absolutely ridiculous,to the best definition of what

(19:56):
ridiculous means to say there'sno evidence for God.

Speaker 5 (20:01):
That's absurd.
Yeah, that's nuts.
What are you talking about?

Speaker 3 (20:07):
blade of grass, every ray of sunshine, every proton
that exists in everysuperimposed state, at all times
in existence, proves there is agod yeah let's look at romans
120 and just read that.
Romans 120 go ahead and readthat jacob when you get there.

Speaker 5 (20:29):
Romans 1, verse 20.

Speaker 3 (20:46):
For since the creation of the world, god's
invisible qualities, his eternalpower and divine nature have
been clearly seen, beingunderstood from what has been
made, so that men are withoutexcuse.
Isn't it staggering to thinkthat, you know, as far as I I
know, he's never picked up inhis hand a photon, correct?
In fact, all of these, likeparticle accelerators and the
things to prove stuff, arelooking for the after effect,
not the actual element.
Remember, he just said if youfind the actual element and you

(21:09):
observe it, then it no longerexists.
All right, so he's willing toaccept that as fact because he
sees evidence of that fact.
I mean, it's not like it'swithout evidence.
You've got a multi-billiondollar particle accelerator
going around and around.
They're exploding these thingstogether and there's evidence of
some things and they're tryingto figure it out with
mathematical formulas.
Okay, you've got some evidencethat you're acting on correct,

(21:39):
correct?
And you can't look at the wholeuniverse and space and space
time and the moon and the starsand the trees.
I know I'm kind of, but it goes.
We'd be here on and on and onof proof that there is a god.
Correct?
Romans 120 again.
For since the creation of theworld, god's invisible qualities
.
So scripture acknowledges godis invisible, but that's why it

(22:01):
gets goading when they go.
Well, that's why religion'sfaith as if our faith were based
on just some airhead opinionthe faith that I have in Jesus
Christ is factual, is scientificin nature, is logical in nature
and it also comes fromexperience and walking with God.

(22:21):
It's a very tangible real thing.
I don't know where they getthis idea that well, faith is
just faith.
You just read scripture and youcan be a mindless boob and an
idiot and you just have toaccept.
And that's why all thesereligious people are just wrong
because it's just faith.
There's another lady, I don'thave time to play her, she has
one of these British tightaccents and same thing it has to

(22:46):
do with well, god is this andonly that, and Christian faith
is just that, it's just faith.
Well, god is this and only that, and Christian faith is just
that, it's just faith, whentheir definition of faith is not
an honest, realistic, practical, scientific definition of faith
.
Romans goes on to say hisexternal power, his divine

(23:06):
nature.
You can look at the universeand see a divine nature that's
involved.
He talks about the universe, hetalks about space.
He talks about man'sachievement of sending
satellites up there and we'relanding on meteorites and we're
bringing back samples and so onand forth, and he doesn't see
the fact that those things existand that they're real, and all

(23:27):
the math that we put behind it,that there's not a divine power
that created these things.
You really do, without any,just looking down on them and
going man, you're just a fool.
That makes no sense at all.
Okay, have been clearly seen,being understood from what has
been made so that men werewithout excuse.
That's why, if I never preachthe gospel or I never get to sit

(23:51):
down and talk with him or Inever even get to read this
scripture, he will dieaccountable to god because the
grass he walks on, the mechanicsby which a car is made or a
rocket ship is made or atelescope is made, everything
that he's allowed to do in thephysical universe is a
demonstration that god exists.

(24:11):
Mm-hmm.
All right, so we've establishedthat god exists.
So that debate's over withright jacob, correct?
Well, let's go to zephaniah 3, 5and let's kind of answer his
question of like well, there'sdisease and there's destruction
and there's wars and there's allthese terrible things and the

(24:31):
universe itself is like full ofviolence and you've got black
holes and you've got all of thisturmoil going on.
You've got stars sucking inother stardust, right.
So therefore, god must be evil.
That's his conclusion.
Yes, because there is turmoilin the world, death and
destruction and all of thesethings going on that we don't

(24:55):
like, and I'm one of those whodoesn't find them pleasurable at
all.
Somehow God must be guilty.
That's his conclusion.
Not that we deserve it, andthat's what you were talking
about earlier, and we'll seethat here in a moment Because
the reason that Neil sees thesethings as evil is because he
doesn't realize how wicked he is.

(25:16):
Zephaniah 3, verse 5.
Go ahead and read that, jacob.

Speaker 5 (25:21):
The Lord within her is righteous.
He does no wrong.
Morning by morning he dispenseshis justice, and every new day
he does not fail.
Yet the unrighteous know noshame.

Speaker 3 (25:36):
What all of these scientists fail to do is they
look at the misery in the worldor all the things in the Bible
that look like they were wrongto have been done and conclude
that God is evil.
They don't show any shame thatit could be as you stated, jacob
, and as Scripture stated, thatwe're all fell into sin and we

(25:57):
deserve everything that we get.
I mean, we're able to graspthat concept with a prisoner
that's taken into the electricchair because he murdered three
or four people or a family.
Right, don't we go?
He deserves that Correct, yeah,hang him, hang him, hang him.
And that he deserved to be injail for 10 years and by himself
and face the consequences ofhis crimes, and no one's above

(26:21):
the law.
You know that classic liethat's out there everywhere.

Speaker 5 (26:23):
No one's above the law except everybody else.

Speaker 3 (26:25):
That's above the law.

Speaker 5 (26:26):
Yeah, yeah, except yeah.

Speaker 3 (26:29):
I know.

Speaker 5 (26:32):
I'm sorry.

Speaker 3 (26:32):
I'm sidetracking.
Yeah, that's a whole otherissue.
I was looking at all thedifferent videos and it's just
so hard to stay away from theinjustice that's going on.
In fact, I've probably got toomuch in here today.
Romans 3, verse 12,.
Neil, let's read it for you,since you refuse to humble
yourself and look at it.
All have turned away.
That includes you.
You're part of all, Neil.

(26:52):
All have turned away.
They have together becomeworthless.
Neil, you are worthless.
You're talking braggart abouteverything that you know and you
like to hear yourself chat, andit all comes back to you over
and over again and you'restealing God's wisdom, his
structure, his science, how he'sdone things to bring attention
to yourself, his structure, hisscience, how he's done things to
bring attention to yourself.
You are just like the devil,who had all the glory of God,

(27:16):
who was the guardian of God'sthrone, and guess what?
He seized it for himself andbecame a selfish, brute beast, a
demon that was once an angel.
Did I explain that pretty clear?
Yeah, and that's just forstarters, neil.
We can keep going, or you canget into the prayer closet and

(27:36):
ask god to show you just howtrue that is.
You deserve the famine.
You deserve destruction.
It's just one criminal againstanother criminal.
We see that in the justicesystem there is no quantitative
difference between the policeand the crook.
Is there jacob?
No, none.
All have turned away.
They have together becomeworthless.
No one.
There is no one who does good.

(27:57):
Romans 3.12.
Not even one.
Romans 3.13,.
Their throats are open graves.
Their tongues practice deceit.
The poison of vipers is ontheir lips.
You harness your tongue to brag, boast and talk.
What more can I say?
You need to repent.
Then you might understand thatall the evil in the world, in
fact, the book of Revelationsays that God causes the world

(28:19):
to go to war with one another.
There is a plan through all ofthis and God is doing nothing
wrong.
He's dispensing justice, andthe only reason that the proton
of this universe is notcompletely dead, gone and over
with in an instant, is.
God is trying to give you, Neil, and everybody else, time to
repent.
Because if that's the nature ofprotons that they're created

(28:41):
and they're instantly where theyneed to be and there's no sense
of time God had to introducetime into a fallen universe to
give me and Jacob and those fewwho want to repent a chance to
repent.
Because, technically, if Godbacked up and just let
everything run its course andall the protons be where they
need to be instantaneously.
This thing would have been overwith, wouldn't have Jacob.

Speaker 5 (29:03):
Correct.
If he didn't give people timeto repent, then because we are
all guilty at birth, so thenwe'd all go to hell.
But it's actually his love andmercy that even gives us the
chance.

Speaker 3 (29:16):
That's right.
Instantaneous photons.
Instantaneous, without anychance to repent.
Now, that's an unloving God.
Yeah, all right, let's go backto Romans 1.20, and let's read
it and kind of finish up withthis whole area and see who Neil
is on this issue, and him andmany other scientists.
Romans 1.20,.
For since the creation of theworld, god's invisible qualities

(29:39):
, his eternal power and divinenature have been clearly seen,
being understood from what hasbeen made, so that all men are
without excuse.
I mean, that's just afundamental, basic, solid
scripture.
That's like photon, that's likegive me a mathematical formula.
That's solid, it'sunderstandable.
God is invisible.

(29:59):
We see his qualities, bang.
I don't know what else you need.
Whether it's the big bang,little bang, no bang, whatever,
that doesn't matter.
That would just be fun toexamine if God allowed it.
Romans 121.
Just be fun to examine if Godallowed it.
Romans 1.21.
Here's the key, for althoughthey knew God, they neither
glorified him as God nor gavethanks to him.
Did you see Neil go?

(30:19):
Yes, there is a God and thereis a wonder to this whole
universe and there's spinningstars and different things going
on.
What an amazing, powerful God.
Why should I ever think I couldunderstand morality, what's
good and what's needed, becausea God that is clearly that
powerful has something going forhim.
So maybe, just maybe, I couldbe wrong about his character and

(30:42):
it has more to do with my dark,sinful mind that can't grasp it
, and if he would give me mercyto understand it, then we could
unravel the love of God.

Speaker 5 (30:52):
Definitely did not say that.

Speaker 3 (30:54):
No, for although they knew God, they neither
glorified him as God nor gavethanks to him.
But their thinking becamefutile.
Look at that.
He goes through all of that andat the end it's what Futile
it's just.
Yeah, it dies.
It's empty, like okay, whereare you going to go with this so
you can fathom black holes,time and travel and quantum

(31:15):
mechanics and this over here andthough, you can entertain
millions of people, make a goodliving, having all that money
and prestige, going on by justtalking about what god has done,
stealing his glory.
You can grab all of that if youwant.
And then what do you have atthe end of the day?
Nothing, nothing.
No relationship with the livingGod, no acknowledgement of God,

(31:36):
no heart of thanks to God.
Think how cold it is to examinethe whole universe and to
understand it, and he mayunderstand it far more clearly
than I do.
But there's no joy, there's nopraise.
But their thinking becamefutile and their foolish hearts
were darkened.
And although they claim to bewise, romans 1.22 says what did

(32:01):
they become?
Jacob Fools, fools.
It's easy enough.
It's easy enough to see thathe's a fool.
Don't say it looking down onhim.
I was born a fool.
I was born a sinner but, praiseGod, I'm repenting of being a
fool.
All right, jacob.

(32:22):
Next question, we're going tocome down to a little more
mundane now.
I know you never go toMcDonald's.
I don't either.
I never cheat.
Um, I know you never go tomcdonald's, I don't either, I
never cheat.
But suppose we pulled into afast food restaurant and you
order, you know whatever it is,you order, and you get back a
receipt in the box with the foodin it and on the box has the

(32:42):
word help written on it and onthe receipt has the word help
written on it and you're throughthe drive-thru.
Mm-hmm, would you call thepolice?

Speaker 5 (32:54):
um, would I call?
No, probably not.
You wouldn't call the police.
Uh, no, if I truly thoughtsomebody because this is a that
would be a very weird, awkwardthing and would I would probably
do like some, investigatingmyself if I think somebody

(33:16):
really does need help beforecalling the police.
Yes, my, my first reaction.
I'm talking through thescenario here, but my first
reaction is is to not call 911.
It better be a real, realemergency, and I know it's an
emergency before I ever call9-1-1 the um.

Speaker 3 (33:32):
Pull up the image there if you can find it real
quick, it shows a picture of thehelp on the receipt there you
go.
I guess it's at freddy's.
You see the word help there.
And then also on the receipt.
It has it right.
Yes, all right, and I'veactually given the link for this
article.
You can put it up later if youwant, all right.
So what happened is the samedebate that we're having.

(33:53):
This couple we're having dothey call the police or not?
And let me read a little bit ofthe quote here Most will also
let you stay anonymous if youtell them.
In other words, you call in andyou go hey, somebody left me
with this help and you call thepolice.
This is the police kind ofresponding, saying you can

(34:19):
remain anonymous, if it's noproblem, then they will.
They will walk away withabsolutely no backlash.
Better to be safe than sorry.
This is the police talking.
Then an actual cop commentedwith the same sentiment I'm a
police offer officer, doesn'thurt to call.
We'd show up two or threeofficers investigate what's
going on.
Best case it's a joke.
Worst case they're being heldup.
I personally wouldn't arrestanyone involved, but would ask

(34:40):
that they not do this again.
If it were a joke, Ah, friendlycop, right.

Speaker 5 (34:45):
Jacob, yes, yes, very friendly.
What could?

Speaker 3 (34:49):
go wrong, jacob?
Oh boy, I don't know, it wouldbe a very tough, tough call.
Do I actually call the policethat this cop is slinging this
story?
You get cops lie every day.
They know, how to play good copand they know how to play bad
cop, which are really both badcops, right yeah, bad cop, bad
cuff, and there's no good copone's just smiling at you, the
the other is tasering you, soit's the same thing.

(35:11):
So what he's saying is oh, youknow, it's better to call and be
safe than sorry.

Speaker 2 (35:18):
I mean the worst case .

Speaker 3 (35:19):
The worst case is we show up, somebody's being held
up, we handle the situation.
Then, if nothing's going on, wepolitely go over and go.
Hey, you know that wouldn't benice to do again.
How about?

Speaker 2 (35:32):
does that?

Speaker 3 (35:32):
even sound like, does he not sound?

Speaker 5 (35:34):
like he's in fantasy land.
Yes, fantasy land.
There is no way all right.

Speaker 3 (35:42):
So what could possibly go wrong?
We'll first play jury jot andthen let's just play some things
that could go wrong this.

Speaker 1 (35:51):
This is a jury.
Jot.
Jot the following down beforeserving on a jury, ready to jot
it down.
Do not be conned by the legalsystem, so that you might see
the face of God, psalm 117, forthe Lord is righteous, he loves

(36:11):
justice.
Upright men will see his face.
The Consider podcast Examiningtoday's wisdom, folly and
madness wwwconsiderinfo.

Speaker 3 (36:30):
Before we play these clips, Jacob, what could
possibly go wrong?

Speaker 5 (36:34):
Well, I'm guessing a lot goes, because I don't know
what's going to happen here.
I'm guessing a lot goes wrong,since you keep asking the
question what could go wrong?

Speaker 3 (36:43):
Well, not in this situation, of course, but let's
see, they could shoot your dog.

Speaker 5 (36:47):
They could tase you.
Oh, this is a hypothetical.
We don't know what happened inthis case.

Speaker 3 (36:51):
Just things you basically know in the news.
What could possibly go wrong?
Oh, you could show up and saystop well, no, you could also
like.

Speaker 5 (36:58):
You could be like well, I'm gonna report this, and
then the cops show up and thenthey determine that it like was
a joke, but then they turnaround and arrest you for like
wasting their time oh, who knowshow many times do cops arrest
the person that calls 9-1-1?
Very common oh absolutely.

Speaker 3 (37:15):
Could they possibly show up, and it was a joke, but
they wound up killing somebodyoh yeah, oh yeah, they, oh they.

Speaker 5 (37:21):
The other person like had a knife at the restaurant.
Yeah, it's a restaurant, so whoknows?

Speaker 3 (37:25):
they were cutting meat and then they shot them oh,
it was a plastic fork, but the,the officer, felt threatened.
Felt threatened, yeah.
So they walk in and maybesomebody has an attitude,
because not everybody just lovescops about them.
Oh hey, how you doing, mrofficer, you know, and they they
don't.
I remember when I got harassedat mcdonald's by the union
called city police.

(37:46):
I barely slipped through thatsituation.
So this is not a black problemor white problem.
This is the totally corruptprosecutor, judge, police
problem.
A lot could go wrong.
People could die.
Somebody could have their dogright.
They pull into mcdonald's, theygot their little service dog
going in, right, and the dogstarts barking because no dog

(38:07):
never barks at a police officer,right, correct.
So the policeman feelsthreatened.
What does he do?
Shoot the dog, shoot the dog,taser the owner and go.
I felt threatening.
Some judge, like judge lori ksmith or beth andres goes.
Oh yeah, yeah, that's fun.
You can line to wherever, right.
A lot more could go wrong thancould ever go, right, correct?
All right, let's play a clip.

(38:29):
Play this mother waiting infront of school.

Speaker 7 (38:33):
He tasered a mother with her children in a school
parking lot.

Speaker 9 (38:37):
Lieutenant Furman, Melvindale Police Department.
I'm a traffic enforcementofficer.
I'm a major driver's licenseattorney.
You're on a tragic stop.
Don't tell me one second.

Speaker 1 (38:45):
Hold on, sir.
I'm giving you a lawful policeorder.

Speaker 9 (38:48):
You're going to be over inside of a school parking
lot.
It's a public access parkinglot.
I have full jurisdiction, justlike I do that roadway.
So lose the attitude and loseyour instructed.

Speaker 7 (39:04):
You have to be prepared that there's on the
road like Furman who are goingto do this kind of crap.
You have to have your license,registration and proof of
insurance up in your visor,inside your trifold, ready to go
.

Speaker 9 (39:12):
Hey turn the vehicle off right now I'll give you a
lawful order, and I'm worriedabout my safety because you're
not doing what I told you hisgoal is to escalate, to
disorient her so that he canarrest her.

Speaker 7 (39:25):
But he's going to do far worse.

Speaker 9 (39:26):
I asked for your ID.
Can I ask your mom to come hereright quick.
Please Give me your ID.
No, I'm not giving you my ID.

Speaker 4 (39:32):
You have to run.
Get out of the vehicle, getyour hands off my face.

Speaker 9 (39:38):
I don't understand.
I'm confused.
You're going to be tasered.
Help, help, help, help, help.
Down to the ground.
Taser the plane Down to theground.
Taser to play Down on theground.
Step out of the vehicle, out ofthe car.
I told you numerous times giveme the key and your ID.

Speaker 7 (39:59):
There is just no reason to put her in torture
cuffs.
There's no reason to treatpeople the way that this
government has determined thatwe should be treated.
It takes one governor in onestate to change everything where
we get rid of the incarcerationsystem.

Speaker 3 (40:15):
You just want to weep when you watch that, don't you
Jacob?

Speaker 5 (40:18):
I know there's almost no words.
It's like obvious, and yetnothing changes.

Speaker 3 (40:29):
We went through the same thing with the city of
Enumclaw, police and Washingtonstate prosecutors.
All right, go ahead and playthe next one, the beat down.

Speaker 7 (40:38):
This guy spends 44 years in prison and the two
women who lied about him showabsolutely no remorse Back in
1977, vincent Simmons was justtaking a walk through a park
when police arrested him.

Speaker 4 (40:49):
out of nowhere.
He was taken along with sixother men for a lineup and,
tragically, he was the one thegirls picked, turns out, two
14-year-old white twins, karenand Sharon Sanders, had claimed
that a black man had assaultedthem on a remote back road.
They said they met a black manat a bar while hanging out with
their cousin, keith Laborde, andoffered him a ride.
They claimed that after gettinginto the car, the man pulled a

(41:10):
knife, forced them into thetrunk and then attacked them.
And despite Simmons having analibi backed by multiple
witnesses, he was still foundguilty.
In the end, simmons wassentenced to 100 years in prison
with no chance of parole.
While locked up, simmons neverstopped fighting to prove his
innocence, but every request wasdenied.
It wasn't until 1993, 16 yearslater, that he finally got

(41:31):
copies of the hidden documents.
Those files revealed shockingfacts.
Medical reports showed sharonsanders hyman was intact and
neither of the twins had anybruises or signs of physical
assault.
The real story the twins liedtrying to cover up inappropriate
behavior with their cousin.
Finally, in 2022, at 70 yearsold, vincent simmons walked free
.
No apology, no compensation,only his lawyer, justin Bonas,

(41:55):
gripping his hand and tellinghim Free man, you free brother.
You free.

Speaker 8 (42:01):
Meanwhile, the people responsible for stealing nearly
half a century of his life saidwe still have our anxiety, we
still have our depressions, westill have our fears.

Speaker 7 (42:11):
Sometimes and not just a woman, but anybody when
they play the victim, they gothrough life and they tell
everybody around them howthey're a victim.
They're a victim, they're avictim, and then everybody
around them creates thisecosystem.
This guy deserves $10 millionmore for 44 years of his life,
and these two women should go tojail for what they've done.

Speaker 3 (42:32):
Look familiar Jacob.

Speaker 5 (42:34):
Look super familiar.

Speaker 3 (42:35):
Very familiar.
I bet Prosecutor Simmons andJudge Beth Andrews and Judge
Laurie K Smith are excited goingoh yeah, that's great.
That's fantastic.
That's what we call justice,because they did the exact same
thing.
Yeah, that actually wasn't thebeat down, but I put that in
there because way way toofamiliar.
And the part about the echochamber, all of.

(42:59):
If you're accused of a sexualcrime in king county
prosecutor's office, understandthey have an echo chamber
installed and every lie getsreinforced because they're not
looking for liars, they'relooking to reinforce any and
every lying accusation forthemselves.
They literally have no interestin justice and that is provable

(43:24):
.
And you just go by considerinfoto discover that truth.
Anything on that, jacob?
No, all right, go ahead andplay.
What could possibly go wrong?
Let's do the next one, jacob.

Speaker 7 (43:35):
This is the actual beatdown three or four cops jump
on a guy and then they juststart wailing on him.
This is a guy resisting.
He can't be.
There's over 600 pounds on topof him.
Check this out.
It's just a good old-fashionedbeatdown.
We see the cops punching himwhile his head is on the

(43:59):
concrete.
Then the cop grabs him by thehair and tries to slam his head
into the concrete while theother cop is dropping knees into
the man.
The third cop then stands upand starts kicking the man from
a standing position.
If that was you or I, we'd becharged with attempted murder.
This is absolutely disgusting.

(44:20):
I'm going to put the unblurredversion of this on X.
Please pop over there and watchit.

Speaker 3 (44:26):
You know, jacob, when people go in for jury duty, I
wish the prosecutors excuse me,let me rephrase that I wish the
defense attorneys in Washingtonstate would get their act
together and push for that up ona video screen when somebody
comes in for the jury pool, thatthe defense gets one hour to

(44:46):
play any videos they want aboutthe justice system and to put
and I be glad to put it together.
I'll be glad, but every journeythey, they should at least go
by youtube and look at all theabuse and spend one hour looking
at this stuff before you ever,ever go into jury duty.
Uh, I need to stop becausewe're gonna run out of time.

(45:08):
All right, jacob, here'sanother good one.
You're on a motorcycle.
Yeah, you're doing bad stuff.
You're trying to run out oftime.
All right, jacob, here's anothergood one.
You're on a motorcycle.
Yeah, you're doing bad stuff.
You're trying to get away.
Although running away from thecops anymore, that's justifiable
on every level.
I'm not telling you to do it,because it's only going to make
things worse, but whensomebody's after you and you
know they're going to do youharm and the reputation is
they're thugs and they will beatyou down and falsely accuse you

(45:31):
, what can be more natural thanto run To flee?
To flee, it's human instinct,all right.
So motorcycle guy is doing histhing.

Speaker 4 (45:41):
That cop should be in jail this cop was trying to
chase a speeding rider.
Watch the way he stopped him,oh my.

Speaker 3 (45:49):
God, oh, give me an ambulance.
I knocked him off his bike,he's unconscious.

Speaker 7 (45:55):
Most cops are pigs.

Speaker 8 (46:00):
Most cops are terrible, horrible, disgusting
people.
Calm down, calm down, crazy.

Speaker 7 (46:05):
Crazy.
Now they'll say, oh, I'm just aperson doing my job.
No, you're not bro, You're asadist.
You signed up so that you couldget behind someone, you could
watch them lock up as they drive.
You signed up so you could puttorture cuffs on people.
You signed up because you wantto hurt people.

Speaker 5 (46:21):
That guy, the guy we keep using these clips wow, he's
definitely going after him.

Speaker 3 (46:29):
He lays it out really clear.
Why do you think I'm using it?
Because he's not messing around.
It's absolute truth at thispoint.
Yeah, you can see that kid thatwas on the bike he's seizuring.

Speaker 5 (46:40):
Oh yeah, he's twitching, he's twitching bad
and these cold cops will go upand go calm down.

Speaker 3 (46:47):
Oh yeah, call.
What do you mean calm down?
Whatever you just been slammed.
Your, your body's in shock.
He's lucky he didn't gettasered well, and we don't.

Speaker 5 (46:56):
We don't know the outcome of that.
The guy could have spinalinjuries.
That's why he's twitching.
I mean, oh, who knows?

Speaker 3 (47:03):
absolutely Absolutely .
What would happen if he?

Speaker 5 (47:06):
just Calm down.

Speaker 3 (47:07):
What Not chase the guy?

Speaker 5 (47:09):
Yeah, I know, yeah or no.
Okay, he's chasing the guy, butyou don't have to-.
Oh no, you don't have to ramhim, like it's a video game.

Speaker 3 (47:21):
Not only that, I'm just saying okay, fine police,
you can't catch everybody.
Correct, there's a line betweenwhat endangers the individual
and what's worth doing.
He's not shooting anybody.
No, I mean, I don't know whyhe's running, but whatever, on a
logical you know what, the onlyreason he didn't get tasered.
Can you tell me why he didn'tget tasered, or even shot for

(47:41):
that matter, jacob?

Speaker 5 (47:45):
No, I don't know why.
Well.
Well, because if he's well, ifthe cop already knows that he
can't fight back, there's noneed to tase, I guess oh, there
you go.

Speaker 3 (47:54):
Why are you applying logic?
You know, you know they, thesecops, never go.
Well, I'm not going to taserhim and shoot him because he's
so injured.
I'm sympathetic, I don't wellthen, why?
But why, I don't know becausethere's only one cop there oh,
there's only one.

Speaker 5 (48:10):
Well, wait, well, there was only one cop with the
other lady who he dragged out ofthe car well, I don't want to
debate my.

Speaker 3 (48:17):
I'm not trying to hold that, this is a scientific
fact.
Yeah, yeah, I, I think the latethere may have been a cop in
the background, but, and again,the that's the problem.
There's no predicting thisstuff.
I'm just saying on this level,at this one, the reason why the
cop seems to be reasonable, thepack mentality is not kicked in.
If you had another cop there,or another cop, three cops there

(48:38):
, the odds go way up,exponentially that he would have
been tasered or certainlykilled.
Sure, yeah, but I'm not arguingyour point.
It's meaningless really.
It's like, dude, just somebodyneeds to pass some laws.
I mean, obviously enumclawdetective grant mccall needs to
be in prison.
Yeah, that, and that's theminimum level to begin this
process.

(48:59):
But, whatever, nobody seems tobe willing to even consider it
all.
Right, then let's play the lastone.
This area is called the pastorbeat down, after all that to be
willing to even consider it Allright.
Then let's play the last one.
This is called the PastorBeatdown, after all that, to be
attacked to not be able to fightback.

Speaker 4 (49:10):
I want to supervise you here, tyrant.

Speaker 8 (49:12):
It started as a verbal dispute outside a
Worcester Baptist church andwithin minutes escalated as
Reverend Joseph Rizzuti Sr waschased into the church by police
.
Their body cam video showingthe chaotic frenzy.

Speaker 3 (49:24):
Three years nobody knew what happened police their
body cam video showing thechaotic frenzy.

Speaker 8 (49:27):
Three years nobody knew what happened.
Now the video re-does it allthe sounds of the reverend being
tased A civil suit claimingthree times and allegedly longer
than regulations allow I needan ambulance.
He says he never resistedarrest but was defending himself
, his son and pregnantdaughter-in-law.
They were acquitted of chargesincluding assault and battery on
a police officer and resistingarrest.

Speaker 7 (49:45):
It didn't bring much relief, as your reputation gets
damaged and the pain that myfamily went through.
You leave your loved one in thehands of these demons.
They will kill them.
You have to be able to push thecops back.
I'm not saying the FifthAmendment cop card is going to
always push the cops back, butif you follow a rigid set of
policies, procedures andprotocols, the chances of you

(50:05):
getting out of there are a lotbetter.

Speaker 3 (50:08):
Yeah, maybe, so maybe not.

Speaker 5 (50:10):
Maybe.
So yeah, Any comments?

Speaker 3 (50:11):
Jacob no, this stuff's very real.
The City of Enumclaw policeliterally ran us out of town as
a church because Radical BaptistCity of Enumclaw detective
grant mccall didn't like ourchurch.
It really was.
I mean, he was a cop, thereforeanything was acceptable for him

(50:33):
to do.
And the destruction that kingcounty prosecutors did, right,
jason simmons and all the otherpeople I could list again.
Go back to considercom.
This stuff is very, very realand what's happening is and I'm
not going to use the word goodcop, but the honest cop is
leaving.
Yeah, there's no such thing asa good cop, because there's no

(50:54):
such thing as a good person.
But the honest cop who merelydoes his job, doesn't escalate
situations, and even then I'mjust, they're not that honest
because they're not turning inthe other cops that aren't.
But that said, they're leavingthat whole thing.
All right, this, actually thiswhole area of justice, went on
just a little longer than I hadin mind, jacob, any comments or

(51:18):
anything on that?
No, all right, since we weretalking about computers and
quantum mechanics and all that.
This next session is going tobe a little bit long, but it's
worth doing.
Have you heard of the OmegaCode?
No, the Omega Code wasdiscovered by a quantum computer
.
Did you bring your crayon withyou?

(51:41):
I do have crayons, yes, and didyou pull out your favorite?
Because I'm very scientifichere and so when you're
explaining to the layman, youbring in the most basic element.
Did you bring your coloringsheet with you?
I have a coloring sheet.
Yes, what is the picture on thecoloring sheet?

Speaker 5 (52:00):
It is of two men on horses.
Are they cowboys?
Yes, they look very cowboyish.
One has a cowboy hat.
They've got like, you know,like those little roll bag
saddle things, I don't know.
Yeah, they're very cowboyishWestern.

Speaker 3 (52:18):
Are they the ones that stole America?

Speaker 5 (52:22):
I'm kidding, don't even go there, that's not my
point.

Speaker 3 (52:25):
All right, jacob, take your crayon, okay, and
start filling in a section.
You know, just kind ofhighlighting and all that I got
to get some brown Get as closeto the line without going over
the line when you color, youknow, when you're a kid I don't
know whether they do it now ornot and say you know, don't
color outside the lines, kind ofthing.

Speaker 5 (52:45):
I don't know whether they do it now or not and say
you know, don't color outsidethe lines, kind of thing.
Yes, I do know.
Yep, yep, yep.
Do they still do?

Speaker 3 (52:48):
that?
Or are you supposed to coloroutside the lines and be chaotic
?

Speaker 5 (52:51):
I tell my kid to stay in the lines.

Speaker 3 (52:54):
Well, we may want to cut that part out, all right,
anyway, so you start coloring,get as close to the line as
possible, but don't go over theline.
Correct, you can color on theline, but don't go over the line
.
Yes, now what would you expectand anticipate to happen as you
attempt to do that?

Speaker 5 (53:15):
I mean, my whole goal is that none goes over the line
but a tiny bit.
I mean, if you had a microscopeI'm sure I went over somewhere.

Speaker 3 (53:23):
Correct, it's going to go over the line.
There's no way that it's goingto become more perfect, right?

Speaker 5 (53:29):
Correct, unless you like, sat here for countless
hours and maybe you don't goover the line, but then at some
point you didn't probably fillit all in.
You, microscopically, are notcoloring it at all.

Speaker 3 (53:40):
That's right.
It's going to get the closeryou get to trying to do it, it's
going to get what we will callmore chaotic.
Yes, you're not quite close tothe line, then you go over the
line.
Then you, even if you get onthe line, the crayon is going to
be thick enough that it's goingto go over the line.
It would take a huge amount ofeffort to perfectly color up to

(54:02):
the line or on the line and notgo over the line or not even be
shaded up to the line, right,correct?
So you don't expect moreperfection, you expect more
chaos, correct, correct?
That's what's happening withquantum computers and we're not
going to be able to get into allthe details.
But what they discovered wasthis weird phenomenon that when

(54:26):
you begin to run a quantumcomputer, you bump into what's
called an omega code and thingsget more perfect and not chaotic
, which should not exist.
And the implication of this isthat one consciousness could
happen on a computer.
Two, that it's as if somebodydesigned a secure code to keep

(54:51):
you from going to that perfectstate.
Another way to put that is thatwhen somebody's writing
software code that they don'twant somebody to actually
discover the code, what do theydo.
They encrypt it right so youcan use the code, you can move
through it, you can put itstools to work.
But if you actually try to getto the code, it's encrypted, and

(55:16):
that's what these scientistsare comparing this to, and weird
things happen.
They got up to the Omega codeand all of a sudden the computer
locked up.
Not only did this perfect statehappen, happen many times, the
computer would just lock up andit took serious, hard reboots to
get the computers to go again,and even in a couple cases, the

(55:37):
whole area turned blue.
There was this kind of blueglow or glow or orb kind of
thing surrounding it and theequipment began to malfunction.
Things began to be erased andwhat their conclusion is that
someone had designed it to keepmankind from discovering the

(55:57):
source code.
So now that I've probablyconfused everybody, totally go
ahead and play this Omega code,because what this has
implications for obviously isthe mark of the beast and we're
not going to be able to go intothat today.
I just want us to look at thesescientists who can discover the
omega code, but there's no god,so we have this bubble bath of

(56:19):
universes.

Speaker 5 (56:20):
So there was something before Genesis,
chapter 1, verse 1.

Speaker 2 (56:25):
In February 2025, a Sycamore-class quantum processor
was running a routineentanglement experiment when,
buried deep in the expecteddecoherence noise, an impossible
pattern emerged a perfectlyrecursive, self-similar sequence
of qubit outputs repeatingacross multiple runs, as if
resisting degradation OmegaPattern.

(56:46):
It wasn't a glitch, it was amessage, and as soon as
researchers realized itssignificance, the logs went dark
.
The Omega Pattern emerges.
Imagine a universe whererandomness is sacred, where true
quantum noise is the ultimatesource of unpredictability.
Now imagine pulling from thatnoise a flawless fractal
sequence that evolves, foldsback on itself and echoes

(57:10):
through Hilbert space like acosmic mantra.
That is the Omega Pattern.
Within seconds of its discovery, someone in the lab whispered
we were never supposed to seethis.
A single slide in an internalreport flagged it as
statistically impossible, yetnot random.
When outside auditors arrived,they found blank pages where the

(57:31):
data had been.
All mentions of Omega werestripped from the control
systems, but whispers traveledthrough the corridors.
Something had been discoveredthat shattered our assumptions
about quantum mechanics andsomeone had deliberately tried
to bury it.
Gödel Turing and forbiddenknowledge.
To understand why the Omegapattern matters, we need to
rewind to the early days oftheoretical computer science In

(57:53):
the 1930s.
Kurt Gödel showed that withinany formal system there are true
statements that can never beproved.
Alan Turing took this further,defining the halting problem and
introducing the notion of anuncomputable constant, omega,
which encodes the probabilitythat a random program will
eventually halt.
It's a number that exists yetcannot be fully known.

(58:16):
Fast forward to 2025.
Quantum machines promise toupend computation itself,
tackling problems classicalcomputers could never touch.
But even quantum supremacy hadits boundaries Decoherence,
error correction and sheerrandomness.
Then the Omega Pattern appearedlike Godel's forbidden constant

(58:36):
, slipping through the cracks ofquantum hardware.
Researchers realized the nameOmega Pattern wasn't idle poetic
license.
It echoed that unresolvablemystery, the Hilbert space
attractor theory.
The first major interpretationcame from Dr Lina Cho, a leading
theorist at ETH Zurich.
She proposed that the OmegaPattern represents a fixed point

(58:57):
in Hilbert space, aninformational bottleneck that
resists observation.
In her words, it's as if theuniverse is coded to repel our
gaze at this threshold.
According to Cho, the patternbehaves like an error correcting
code.
Only here it corrects itselfinto a self-referential Loop,
blocking further inquiry.
Her colleagues testedvariations in temperature,

(59:20):
entanglement depth and qubittopology.
The omega pattern persisted andwhere it appeared, the
machine's readout fidelityspiked to near-classical
certainty.
A paradox, since quantum datashould never become more
predictable.
Under entanglement strain,something in the hardware was
aligning with the pattern,reinforcing it as though it
recognized itself.

(59:43):
Replication and the Mirror Omega.
When a team at an internationallab tried to replicate ETH
Zurich's setup, their QPU didn'tjust show the Omega pattern, it
locked into a frozen state ofundefined entropy.
The readout chamber glowed insteady shades of violet for
hours.
Engineers eventually forced ahard reset and retrieved raw

(01:00:03):
qubit logs, only to find acomplementary mirror omega
pattern, not identical but woventogether with the original like
two halves of a hologram.
When superimposed, the twosequences formed a symmetry
reminiscent of deep space errorcorrection codes, those proposed
for interstellar communication.
That's where things get strange.

(01:00:23):
It wasn't just code, it wasbroadcasting.
Whoever or whatever created theomega pattern designed it to be
hidden in quantum chaos butrecoverable across distant
systems.
Philosophical reflection Israndomness an illusion?
We pause here for a moment ofreflection.
What if the bedrock of modernphysics true randomness is?
We pause here for a moment ofreflection.
What if the bedrock of modernphysics, true randomness, is not

(01:00:45):
a feature of nature but adeliberate smoke screen in every
Quantum experiment?
The collapse of the wavefunction is our ultimate unknown
.
We treat it as an unassailablefact, a dice roll at reality's
foundation.
But some thinkers propose thatquantum uncertainty is less an
ontological truth and more ametaphysical firewall preventing

(01:01:06):
us from peering behind nature'scurtain.
Consider the analogy of digitalrights management DRM in
software, developers hide sourcecode behind encryption to
protect proprietary logic.
Now imagine reality itselfemploys a similar trick.
Every time we measure a photonor observe the electron spin,
the universe enforces an errorthat obscures deeper order.

(01:01:28):
The fluctuations we chalk up tochance could be part of an
inbuilt subroutine, one thatscrambles our probes just enough
to keep certain patterns likeomega hidden from cursory
inspection.
Max Tegmark's mathematicaluniverse hypothesis takes this a
step further.
He argues that the universe isa mathematical object, not

(01:01:49):
merely described by mathematics.
If that's true, then its codemust include both the theorems
it obeys and the theorems itprohibits us from proving.
In software terms, it's notjust the functions that run, but
also the guard clauses thatrefuse forbidden calls.
The omega pattern, in this view, becomes the universe's
checksum or integrity check, aninternal test that triggers a

(01:02:11):
self-censoring response wheneverour measurements approach too
close to fundamental constraints.

Speaker 3 (01:02:20):
A lot there.
Did you get it, Jacob?

Speaker 5 (01:02:23):
uh, I got part of it, but it's very interesting yeah,
I actually had to shorten thisthing down.

Speaker 3 (01:02:29):
There's so many ramifications to this that one
I'd be overqualified,overqualified, be underqualified
to even attempt it.
Um, but any couple takeaway, orone takeaway, because what I
did is I watched it severaltimes and go, okay, well, that's
a takeaway and that's atakeaway, and the part that I
had to cut out was thatconsciousness seemed to be

(01:02:52):
achieved by this quantumcomputer because of this
phenomenon, and they wereexplaining what consciousness is
and I got lost in all of that.
So, backing up with this, anyquick takeaway.

Speaker 5 (01:03:06):
I think there's another scripture that I don't
remember the reference.
But the Lord has to come backbecause we would destroy
ourselves.
Technically, I think.
He says nothing would beimpossible for us.
So right now these things are amystery and maybe we'll never
know.
But if we did ever know, we'lljust destroy ourselves
eventually.

Speaker 3 (01:03:26):
That's absolutely true.
I think the easy takeaway forme on this is it's a firewall
that God laid down the basicmathematical formula for the
universe and then he added afirewall of what we call
randomness or chaos, so that wecould never see it.
And the closer we get to it,the chaos interjects itself.

(01:03:48):
But then every once, whilewe're getting close enough with
quantum computers, that it slipsthrough and we can see oh,
there is a firewall, there isthat crayon phenomena that, hey,
we shouldn't be getting a moreperfect drawing, it should be a
little more sloppy.
No matter how much we try, doesthat make sense?
Yeah, it makes sense.
Well, let me take it down to alevel that we all can appreciate

(01:04:10):
and let's go to matthew,chapter 10, verse 28.
Again, we don't have time tolook at it, but it really does
make the whole concept of thepower of the beast and the
Antichrist and all of thatsharply come into focus.
Of here, of what kind of powercould happen that it could be a
conscious computer, because wedon't even understand exactly

(01:04:33):
what consciousness is and whatthat means.
Nor am I really concerned withit, because I do know there's a
reality of a hell and a heavenand a relationship with God, and
that's kind of all I needmeaning.
Oh sure, if God gave me thewisdom, I would thoroughly enjoy
it.
But Matthew, chapter 28, 10,28,.
Why don't you read down toverse 30, jacob, and then we'll

(01:04:56):
just bring this together.

Speaker 5 (01:04:58):
Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but
cannot kill the soul.
Rather, be afraid of the onewho can destroy both soul and
body in hell.

Speaker 3 (01:05:08):
Let me stop you just right there and then I'll let
you read on.
None of these scientists arelooking at this and going hell
could be really real.
If all of these things are true, and even they have to admit.
If all of these things are trueand even they have to admit,
did someone, some entity,whatever create this and that
has that kind of power to hidethat and to do that, do we not

(01:05:30):
think hell could actually reallybe a reality?
And we can't even fathom whatthat hell would be like.
We couldn't even get close, nomore than we can fathom quantum
mechanics and how the universeitself was created, nor how it's
going to end.
We can take God's word for it.
But that's about it.
Correct, correct, all right, goon to read verse 29, because

(01:05:52):
once we have the fear there,then we can get to the love of
God.

Speaker 5 (01:05:56):
Are not two sparrows sold for a penny?
Yet not one of them will fallto the ground, apart from the
will of your father.

Speaker 3 (01:06:06):
Okay, hang on just a second.
Even with that, does that notspell for you mathematical
genius?

Speaker 5 (01:06:17):
Well, the first thing that comes to mind is not
mathematical genius.
The first thing that comes tomind is simply that God is
all-powerful.

Speaker 3 (01:06:25):
Okay, verse 30 might help you.
Clearly, our God lovesmathematics.
Yes, just based on quantumcomputers and basic things that
we know and Einstein's famousequation EM squared over two or
whatever it is.
I probably got that wrong.
Anyway, god clearly is amathematical God.

(01:06:49):
That's one area that he loves,correct, in fact?
Read verse 30 there and we'llkind of put this together.

Speaker 5 (01:06:55):
And even the very hairs of your head are all
numbered.

Speaker 3 (01:07:00):
Okay.
So verse 29 is talking aboutthat God's all-powerful, that he
knows everything that's goingon.
But in verse 30, jesus is kindof telling us how he knows these
things.
I mean, he could have justsimply said look, god knows
everything.
How many birds in the air, howmany fall to the ground.
He's aware of all that.
But is he not hinting to us howhe knows these things?

Speaker 5 (01:07:25):
Well, I feel like it's just well he's hinting how
he knows these things or he'sgoing.
He's just like it's going downto, not a microscopic level, but
he's getting down to a veryfine level, which is hairs,
because hairs are very, verytiny.

Speaker 3 (01:07:39):
But they're numbered?
Yes, that's what I'm afterMatthew 10, 30, are not the very
hairs of your head all numbered?
So we're made within the realmsof mathematical formulas?
Look, that removes it.
I don't want it to remove, thelove of God and all of that.
I'm just giving you kind of themechanics or the quantum

(01:08:01):
computing of what's involved andkeep coming back at me if
you're not getting this.
And I mean again, this is notlike into the world, because the
main point here is that if Godhas numbered every hair on my
head and he's comparing that tothe birds in the air, would he
not know the number of birds?

Speaker 5 (01:08:18):
Oh yeah, Well, he knows it all.
Well, in verse 29 it also saysthat they will not fall to the
ground apart from the will ofthe Father.
So then we get into the will ofthe Father too, right?

Speaker 3 (01:08:33):
And really, yes, the will of the Father.
And so the question would kindof be and we're having fun with
it here is how does god move hiswill along?
For instance, let's just say we, we want to build a building.
You go see an architect andthen they mathematically figure
out the stress loads for thebeams and how tall it can be and

(01:08:53):
what the foundation be could be, right, correct.
So you got a lot of mathinvolved.
Yes, that's a subtext withinhere that you've got God making
birds and he's concerned forthese birds, and his will is
that these species of birds bemade, and that I be so concerned
with mankind and creatingmankind that I'm going to watch

(01:09:14):
over him.
And behind this is themathematical aspect of that.
That's all that really, I'mtrying to communicate at the
moment.
Yeah, does that make sense ornot make sense?
That makes sense.
Okay, then take us out of here.

Speaker 4 (01:09:32):
Nothing on the Consider podcast should be
considered legal or life advice.
Each is admonished to seek aholy God and obey by picking up
a cross to follow Jesus.
The Consider Podcastwwwconsiderinfo.