“KNOW THYSELF” In Quantum Terms

Andre Gaudreault (Gaudwin)
5 min readJan 28, 2022


You will see below why I show an iceberg here.

Question asked in Quora: Why do people believe that space is actually something, instead of total nothingness?

Spike Melon’s response:

It’s the nothing something between other things !!!

Steve Leonard’s comment to Spike Melon’s answer:

This is actually one of the best answers so far!

My rsponse to Steve Leonard:

Space does not exist at the quantum level since, at this level, all “things” are entangled. While, at our level, space is an illusion created by our observations of these “things.”

NB The gist of this piece is my “final response” below…worth reading. I can assure you that it is the best thing about space that you have ever read until now.

Steve Leonard’s reply to my comment:

Does “nothing “ exist?

My (edited) response to Leonard

Does “hate,” “greed,” and “love” exist in themselves? No, but they rule the world.

“The question is not to be or not to be; to be is not to be.” Alan Watts

Allan Watts

Tesla: “If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency, and vibration.”

My version: “If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of [information], frequency, and vibration.”
Why information?

Because strings, according to my theory of quantum reality, are not waves of “energy” propagating themselves in space, since space does not exist, but “Solitons” of information propagating themselves in time, which needs to be redefined in quantum terms.

This hypothesis is promising since it is based on the fact that we don’t know what energy is; and on the proposition that space is a concept that we had to unconsciously assume to objectify the “Savannah,” in which we had to survive away from our original trees (cf Garden of Eden). It is this unconscious concept (Jung and Kant) that has fashioned our “collective consciousness” till then.

That is why the well-known verse of the Bible can be translated as follow:

“In the beginning was the String and the String was with the Singularity, and the String was the Singularity” John 1:1 Quantum Mechanics Version.

What is nice about all this is that it doesn’t matter if you’re a believer or not.*

  • I am 77 and have been a non-believer since 19 when I left the Catholic border school where I attended 1,351 masses (I counted them.)

“Sarcast” about that, Steve!

NB This response of mine has been here expanded a lot since Leonard responded to it.

Steve Leonard’s response to the first version:

It’s not feasible for “something” to occupy every micrometer of infinity…

My response:

You lost me! If there is something here there is something there.

Steve Leonard’s response:

Look, professor…

If space doesn’t have a unique molecular structure, then it is correctly defined as the nothingness that contains everything…

Why is everyone trying to complicate simplicity?

My final response:

Here we go again!

To your “It’s not feasible for “something” to occupy every micrometer of infinity…” I retort that at the quantum level, it is, CF, entanglement.

For me, anything said about space by contemporary “savants” is similar to what the same category of people used to say about angels and needles.

As I said at the outset, space is an illusion created by our observations of reality.

However, you have an excuse. You haven’t yet read my PhD dissertation. I will indeed show in it, using irrefutable evidence understandable by nine-year-olds (I’m no Einstein), that we don’t need space to explain gravitation nor “fields” to explain quantum reality as we didn’t need crystalline spheres and epicycles to explain the nature of the planets nor the ether to explain electromagnetism.

The concept of space is limiting us now as the concepts of crystalline spheres and ether were limiting our forbears.

This dissertation of mine will give us the ability to collectively formulate a functional “Theory of Everything,” giving us the means to finally control the destructive force that we have become as a species after discovering them in nature.

PS I am no professor.

I am an independent “anthropologist of knowledge” who went through life-long fieldwork as a generalist in many different departments of seven colleges and universities to find out why scientists cannot solve the problems created by progress.

My MA proposal presented to Dr. Nora Cebotarev of the University of Guelph (click to enlarge):

I was accepted in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology in 1989 at the advance-age of 44 on account of this presentation, without having followed one course in sociology or anthropology in my two previous general BA acquired at 27 and 37.

I here take the opportunity to posthumously thank the late Nora Chebotarev, who accepted me in the program in 1989 and supported me in the background for four years afterward, allowing me to receive my MA despite all the sociologists and anthropologists I had to encounter during these four years.

As you can see, this Master of Arts does not mention any specialization. It has always been OK with me. However, if I am granted a PhD, I will have the University of Guelph change it to :

Master of Arts in Comprehensive Thinking:

“Of course, our failures are a consequence of many factors, but possibly one of the most important is the fact that society operates on the theory that specialization is the key to success, not realizing that specialization precludes comprehensive thinking. “ — Buckminster Fuller 1960s, Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth (1963) (My bold)

By knowing more and more about less and less, specialists will finally know everything about nothing. While, by learning less and less about more and more, philosophers will finish by knowing nothing about everything. Konrad Lorenz 1978, Behind The Mirror: A Search for a Natural History of Human Knowledge (my paraphrazing)

“A person is smart; people are dumb” Agent K, in Men in Black

During my previous two general BA and my unspecialized MA, I have observed that it is the scientific method and the peer reviews that it has generated that have transformed intelligent people into a collective idiot, mainly because all of the scientific knowledge is based on the misunderstandings of space and time underlying this method.

Here is how I did it:

That is the tip of “all I have to say about that,” for now. Wait till I expose in my dissertation what I have uncovered underneath!



Andre Gaudreault (Gaudwin)

70+generalist, two general BA & one unspecialized MA in ZooAnthropoSociology acquired to find out why specialists cannot solve the problems created by progress.