As far as memes go, it wasn’t particularly viral. However, for several hours on the morning of November 6, “darkest timeline” trended in Google searches, and many physicists posted thoughts on social media about whether we were really in this together. All the possibilities expressed in opinion polls and prediction markets were gathered under one definitive outcome, and history was moving from “what could happen” to “it has now happened.” In this hyper-polarized US presidential election, the two sides agreed on almost nothing other than their shared belief that the outcome would be an inevitable choice between two divergent trajectories for our world.

This raises some pretty obvious (but perhaps pointless) questions: Could the “darkest timeline” (or any other “timeline” for that matter) be real? Could there be a parallel world somewhere far away where Kamala Harris triumphs?

Apart from encouraging escapist sociopolitical fantasies and adding a scientific sheen to the genre, it seems counterfactual historyThe concept of alternative timelines is actually something physicists take very seriously. This concept is most visible in quantum mechanics, which predicts a multitude of consequences.both living and dead cats and all. If a particle of light (a photon) strikes a mirror that is only partially silvered, the particle can, in a sense, both pass through and be reflected from that surface; two mutually exclusive results, known in the language of physics as superposition. Only one of these possibilities will present itself when an observation is made, but until then the particle balances both possibilities simultaneously. This is what the mathematics says and experiments confirm. For example, you can create a superposition and then cancel it by directing the light onto a second partially silvered mirror. This would not be possible unless both possibilities remain in play. Although this property is often framed as subatomic particles, it is thought to be ubiquitous at all scales in the universe.

On supporting science journalism

If you like this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism. I’m subscribing. By purchasing a subscription, you help secure a future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas that shape our world today.

What supports the idea that these timelines are real and not just imaginary fictions is that they “to intervene” with each other, increases or decreases the probability of occurrence. So it’s something that could have happened but not has a measurable impact on to do, It is as if the first one reaches from the dark world of the possible to the world of the real.

Consider this: bomb detector physicists Avshalom Elitzur and Lev Vaidman proposed in 1993 and have since been proven (fortunately not with real bombs): Carry out the experiment with a partially silvered mirror, but insert a photosensitive bomb into one of the two paths the photon can take. This blocking prevents you from creating the superposition to return the traveling photon to its original state. It does this even though the bomb never explodes, showing that the photon never touched it. Only possibility photon can hit the bomb affects what happens. Theoretically, you can use this principle, known as: counterfactual certainty—to take x-ray images of cells without exposing them to harmful radiation. In an emerging topic known as counterfactual quantum computing, a computer generates a value Even if you never press the “run” button.

One way to think about counterfactual certainty is known as the multiple worlds interpretation. A photon striking the mirror causes the cosmic timeline to branch, creating a world in which the particle passes through the mirror and is reflected from its surface. Each of us is trapped inside our own world and therefore only sees one outcome at a time, but the other is still there, visible to the inhabitant of the alternative world. All these worlds taken together, creates a “multiverse”.

Whether or not they agree with the many-worlds interpretation, physicists and philosophers certainly love to argue about this topic. Some admire her elegance; Others lament conceptual difficulties, such as the slippery issue of what exactly constitutes a “world.” Quantum theory not only allows for multiple worlds, but also offers an infinite number of ways to describe them.

But in all the discussions on many worlds, the fundamental insight of the physicist who originated the idea emerged. Hugh Everettis often forgotten. Everett developed his view in reaction to the assumptions of other physicists: Since we can see only one of the superposition possibilities when a particle enters this state, something must cause all other possibilities to be discarded. In other words, a mechanism must collapse the superposition—perhaps the act of observation itself or some occasional contingency inherent in the fabric of reality. Everett realized there was a fallacy in this reasoning: Always The superposition appears to have collapsed even though it remains intact. This is because in making our observation we interact with the particle and become a single unified system with it. Because the particle is in superposition, so are we. But we can’t say. Everett’s basic idea is this: We are part of the reality we seek to observe, but no part fully comprehends the whole, so our view is limited. Multiple timelines emerge in the hidden recesses imposed by our immersion in the universe.

Other branches of physics also think that existence involves bifurcations of timelines. Physicists take counterfactuals into account when calculating a particle’s path; depending on what they say principle of least actionEven a classical particle that does not exhibit a significant quantum effect eliminates all possibilities. In statistical physics, researchers study particles by the septillions, thinking in terms of “ensembles,” another type of multiverse that encompasses all the possible ways particles can be arranged and evolve. Over time, particles explore all the possibilities open to them. We indirectly perceive their machinations as the flow of heat and the establishment of thermodynamic equilibrium. Going beyond the physics, evolutionary biologists also routinely talk about multiple timelines: evolution of speciesWould things have turned out the same?

All of these scientific topics are rooted in a fundamental conundrum: What does it mean to be possible but not real? Why is there one thing instead of another? Physicist Paul Davies called this “the riddle of existence.” It touches not only on esoteric ideas about the branching of timelines, but also on aspects of everyday life such as causality. In order to say that something causes something else, there must be a possibility that that “else thing” will never occur. In astrobiologist Sara Imari Walker’s latest book on the physics of life, The Life That No One Knows, He noted that the entire observable universe does not contain enough material to create every possible small organic molecule, let alone large molecules like the DNA strands we know and love. According to him, living things differentiate themselves by producing molecules and other structures that do not normally exist. The probability of its existence is slim to none.. Life opens a path through the void of the field of possibility.

Perhaps a deep rule selects the true reality from among them. possible factsbut efforts to establish this principle have been serially interrupted. It is difficult to argue that our world is the best of all possible worlds. Despite what the 19th century philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer said declaredDoes it seem like the worst? Things can always get worse, yet Google searches for “darkest timeline.” The obvious conclusion for many, such as philosopher David Lewis and cosmologist Max Tegmark, is this: all possible realities exist.

So the question isn’t whether there are other timelines; There definitely is. Rather, that’s why we only see one. Perhaps life or intelligence would not be possible if the branching were so obvious to us. Physics is full of such prerequisites for our existence. For example, if temporal flow had no directionality—arrow of time– there can be no permanent change, no memories, no intelligence, no agency. Keeping other timelines secret may be of similar importance. Quantum superposition might work some special functions in our bodies, but is otherwise dispersed – along with all traces of alternative timelines – in biology’s powerful exchange of material and energy with the environment. The nature of intelligence is to be selective; We would be paralyzed if we had to analyze limitless infinities. Instead of keeping all possibilities open, the mind should concentrate on one, at least temporarily. The effort required to make that choice and act on it from there may be the key to giving us at least the subjective sense of free will.

So be careful what you wish for. In the dark hours we may dream of alternate timelines and long to escape into another, but we seem inseparable from our own. If it were easier to fly among them, we could only reach oblivion. Like it or not, we are stuck in this situation; If we want to change this, we’ll have to do it the old way.