Within my view, there are a couple things to take into consideration: the article states "Fragments of energy may be the fundamental building blocks of the universe". The statement is not valid. Energy is a three dimensional effect, not a cause, and therefore cannot be a 'fundamental building block'. Perhaps within a conversational phrasing of language the scientists' statement might could be excused, but the scientists' statement - as it stands - is about as incorrect as saying that all human-audible soundwaves exist without the need for air (nor any other suitable medium) nor a need for the source of pressure.
"Using newer mathematical tools, my colleague and I have demonstrated a new theory that may accurately describe the universe." <chuckles> Mathematics cannot measure outside of three dimensions: period. Mathematically measuring the outside of one's home does not describe what is inside, nor detail how the home was constructed, nor describe the human events that led to the construction. Western philosophy suffers from a similar difficulty, that of describing behaviors from the outside effect without first knowing what the inside cause is.
The article's hypotheses are okay for navigating ponderable matter, but the article ought not infer that energy is literally the building block of the universe.
In 1967 I developed a hypothesis of electrical wave function (boring stuff), but around 2003 when I spoke online of the name given to the theory, about ten years later I saw that scientists were claiming to have discovered a similar theory (they gave their theory almost the same name), but it was obvious that the scientists merely copied what someone like myself had written, because, the scientists were unable to explain the reasoning behind the theory, which meant that they could not have possibly arrived at the conclusion without first having the reasoning that formed the conclusion.
I keep a large spreadsheet of over 60 years of pre-dated details that illustrate how the future influences the past (so far the data has been 100% accurate). John Wheeler had his own interpretation that he named 'Self-Excited Circuit', but his work was limited to mathematics and present-moment observations. Some 'stuff' does indeed 'travel' without regard to time and space (measured in seconds to decades), and a portion of that 'stuff' enables self-influence as well as 'energy', the very 'stuff' that science cannot measure.
Of the currently known variables that appear to be necessary for some forms of the 'future influencing the past', one is a specific emotional tone. It is relatively common and expected that some 'ghosts' would be sensed as the manifestation of a strong emotional tone. To some of us, many forms of the 'paranormal' have become very normal. Within the spreadsheet's data, there are two catalysts - three counting oneself - that are always future-accurate when combined. Information cannot and could not travel through time if the universe were indeed structured upon energy.
In a very real way, the tone of one's heart and soul supersedes all of Nature. Maybe it could be said that to become a worthy scientist, first possess a worthy heart.
smartnews.link
