No matter how convincing the proof that our antIs experience of reality is a manufactured and inaccurate proxy for actual reality, it is just plain impossible to believe that what we’re actually experiencing, right now, is an illusion. However, the key to understanding that it is an illusion is our experience of the flow of time itself. Time, flowing through a ‘now’ moment, is where manifest reality, and thus our antIs experience itself, is created. Seeking evidence of times flow outside of an observers antIs experience we’ve instead found evidence for the contrary. The antIs universe is filled with an infinity of ‘now’ moments, relative to various observers in movement relative to one another. Our antIs experience can’t penetrate beyond the boundary of its own ‘now’ moment, yet when multiple antIs observers are present a plethora of unique ‘now’ moments exist. If the moment of manifest reality appears to exist everywhere in space-time, how can it be a ‘now’? Is this the reality for star-dust or quarks? We can’t know because we can’t ask them, we can only observe them from our own antIs experience, and from that observers platform, they appear to move through time as well, an experience we conveniently use to verify the reality of time’s movement and thus antIs reality.

There is yet another piece of evidence piercing the veil of antIs reality. It is the quantum effect of wave-particle duality as observed in Young’s famous double slit experiment. This piece of observed phenomenon stops rational thought in its tracks. None other than Richard Feynman has said that it is the only mystery in quantum mechanics. A big part of that mystery concerns the nature of ‘becoming’. As Niels Bohr commented in a discussion with Werner Heisenberg about the double-slit experiment, ‘To be…to be…what does it mean to be?’ regarding where is the particle? This question places great pressure on the reality of the existence of a ‘now’ moment, where manifest reality is the locus of being. When an observer watches only the detector screen, the particles are observed to exhibit wavelike properties. When an observer detects which slit the particles go through, the particles are observed to exhibit particle like properties. The act of observation seems to determine the ‘being-ness’ of the particle. But then Wheeler’s delayed choice experiment shows both that an observation can be made about which slit the particle goes through, and the particle like nature of the particle will remain intact, so long as the observational information is retained but that if that information is destroyed after the particle has already gone through the slit but has not yet hit the detector screen, the particle will be detected as wavelike again. So it is not enough for manifest reality to bring into existence the nature of a particle, but the knowledge gained in that moment of manifest reality must continue through time’s flow, until such time as it has impacted the detector screen. So a particle, which to our antIs way of experiencing reality, has already made the choice of which slit it has gone through (by dint of our detection of it) and should be observed exhibiting particle like properties at the detector screen, will once again be observed to exhibit wave like properties should we destroy the ‘which slit did it go through’ information, ‘after the fact’, that is, when the  particle has already been detected going through one of the two slits. A change in the state of knowledge of the observed phenomenon will affect the observation itself, even seemingly changing what has already happened in the past. The ‘now’ moment of manifest reality, where ‘is’ moves through ‘will be’ to ‘was’, seems to flicker into and out of existence depending on observational perspective.  These results can be seen as illuminating the illusory nature of antIs experience and antIs reality itself. Our biology, via its reality interpreting machinery tries to fit the square peg of antIs flowing time into the round hole of a totIs universe where time has no such feature.

Given this, let’s ask ourselves, “what is the nature of the antIs observers relationship to totIs reality?” Fundamentally, the antIs observer lives in a world of the unknown. To observe is to experience, through time’s movement, the unknown which becomes known and then recedes into the forgotten. To ‘discover’ appears to be one of the greatest achievements of an observer, to be the first to observe or find something ‘new’. Discovery through observation becomes knowledge. This knowledge emanates from the great well of the unknown as experienced by the antIs observer. Does this unknown actually exist in totIs, outside of an antIs experience? Columbus’ discovery of the new world was not news to either the new world or its inhabitants. The heliocentric solar system, the second law of thermodynamics are not news to to the stars and planets. The very concept of knowing or not knowing, to the elements, is ludicrous and meaningless. The unknown exists only in an antIs experience. It is part and parcel of antIs reality. In the totIs universe, an ‘unknown’ is as meaningless as a ‘when’. In chapter 11 of TotIs I explored the idea that predictive problems of seeming insurmountable complexity are only problems for antIs observers. From our antIs perspective, the totIs universe has no problem with even the most complex problem. Which pathway does a photon take from the center to the surface of a star? Which pathway will a person take from birth to death? Which pathway will a particle take from the emitter to the detection screen? Will we observe a wave like or particle like entity? Without a flow of time the totIs universe is a different sort of place completely. There are neither waves nor particles. In seeking to find the answer to these unknown’s in antIs time, the illusion of antIs experience will reveal to an observer whichever reality it is designed to create. This is why the observers perspective has this uncanny ability to alter the nature of the particles, even in the past, but it occurs only as an antIs experience.