Time travel and consciousness - Nebo D. Lukovich

Time travel and consciousness

JOSEPH K. H. CHENG·THURSDAY, DECEMBER 28, 20171

27/11/2016

Student of Life...

Author

Nebo D. Lukovich

Learner, ReaderResearcher of Consciousness ∞ Mindfulness Teacher

In theory, if you were traveling exactly at the speed of light, time would stop for you completely. Moreover, if you would be traveling faster than light, you would be traveling backward in time!

Time travel is possible. And it’s achievable both “physically” and “mentally.”

First, let us examine time travel in a physical sense, when a traveler uses some sort of physical means to move their selves (including their body) through time, at will.

According to the relativistic physics, it is definitely possible to travel into the future at a rate which is faster than “normal” (let’s say the normal rate is 24 hours a day). You should simply travel through space at the speed near the speed of light.

“Physical” Time Travel

For example, you are traveling with a spaceship to the nearby star which is 10 light years away, at a speed very close to the speed of light. When you get to your destination, say, in 1 year of your travel, you will realize that you are almost 9 years in the future. And going back to Earth, traveling for 1 additional year, you will realize that your twin brother is now 18 years older than you! And the “rate” of traveling into the future depends only on your actual speed.

In theory, if you were traveling exactly at the speed of light, time would stop for you completely. Moreover, if you would be traveling faster than light, you would be traveling backward in time!

The main problem to achieving near-light speed is this: your mass is ever-increasing as you are getting closer to the speed of light. More and more energy should be consumed for acceleration. For reaching the exact speed of light, you should need an infinite amount of energy. That’s why you will never be able to travel at that speed, not to mention traveling faster than light.

We are still in theory. The particles of matter do have some “rest mass,”[1] while light particles (photons) have zero rest mass. Time for photons is standing still, i.e. to “them” there is no time at all. Everything is simultaneous from “their point of view.” Therefore, if we could somehow erase our rest mass, we could perhaps be experiencing our whole individual existence (the past, present and future) simultaneously.

Hypothetically, there could exist a very strange sort of particles, the so-called “tachyons.” Their rest mass is an “imaginary number.”[2] They probably don’t exist whatsoever. It’s interesting that they would always travel faster than speed of light and, which is even more bizarre, they would be traveling backward in time. So, to continue with this extremely speculative string of thoughts, if we could, by some means, convert our “normal” mass into the imaginary mass, we would be traveling backward in time.

Some theoretical physicists postulate another way of traveling through time – by enormously wrapping up the space itself. To achieving that, humanity would have to develop very advanced technology which would allow us to built space ships with the so-called "warp drive", or to create “wormholes” in the fabric of space-time. Currently, nobody knows how that can be accomplished, but that may change in the future.

Some theoretical physicists postulate another way of traveling through time – by enormously wrapping up the space itself.

Although most of the mainstream physicists would disagree with me, I believe that many of these speculations could actually be feasible one day, in a society which is enough technologically advanced.

However, these speculations are only related to a time travel conducted in a physical sense, like a physical travel through space. There could also be another way of traveling through time – using consciousness only.

Are time journeys within mind possible?

There are many accounts of visions, hallucinations and other vivid experiences of both past and future events, experienced by specially endowed people, that have been confirmed as being pretty accurate. Even many more of such intense visions have been dismissed as complete illusions or hoaxes. Were they hoaxes?

These inner visions are very slippery ground for anyone trying to derive some reliable conclusion that it’s possible to see the future or past events. However, there is a point of view trying to explain that some of the apparently false testimonies of future or past events, are actually true. But first, let me describe some unconventional vantage point on this subject, which is still in accordance with recent advances in theoretical physics.

Our consciousness is moving steadily along the fourth axis of the space-time chart. This is actually giving us the impression that everything is changing.

​Our consciousness and relativistic time

In accordance with the theory of relativity, time is interchangeable with space within the space-time continuum. In a way, time is only the fourth (or first) space dimension in that continuum. Our consciousness is moving steadily along that fourth axis of the space-time chart. This is actually giving us the impression that everything is changing. We are moving along that time axis and everything else around us seem to be moving as well.

For example, if you wanted to describe the very basics of the event when you eat an ice-cream last time, you would have to assign three coordinates of space to it. It happened in a point of space that had its precise longitude, latitude and altitude. But, that's not enough. It must have an additional value: the time when it happened. Thus, it is described by four coordinates. Modern physics tells us that these four coordinates are inter-changeable. They are equivalent.

So, when we have a series of mutually connected events, like moving a car from point A to point B, we actually have countless mini-events, each being described with its own four coordinates in the space-time continuum. And when we have a non-moving car on a parking slot, it seems that we now have a completely static situation. No, it's not. It is still moving, through the fourth space-time coordinate, through time. Now note this: as an observer of that seemingly static car, you are also moving through the fourth dimension - time. From a deeper point of view, the only entity that is moving along this fourth dimension is the observer, you.

That seemingly steady translation of our conscious focus, which is happening along that single coordinate of space-time, is deeply ingrained in our subconscious. Although there are many other dimensions and countless possible universes, this particular fourth-dimensional space-time continuum is static per se.

Therefore, all events that “happened” in our “past,” from the perspective “outside” of this space-time continuum, actually exist simultaneously.

​

Quantum theory and timelinesare not some passive experiencers of reality, we are actively choosing our reality ahead and making it real. Still, all those possible lines of time are real, we could say, as “potential realities.”

​Yet, things are even more complicated than all of this. We are not only living in a “block universe” which is static from the 4D perspective; it seems that there are countless real or potential “block universes.” Quantum physics tells us that, in every single moment of our conscious existence we are “collapsing the quantum wave function” and choosing only one of the myriad possible universes that lie ahead of us.

So, we are not some passive experiencers of reality, we are actively choosing our reality ahead and making it real. Still, all those possible lines of time are real, we could say, as “potential realities.” These potential realities are also part of the whole picture. Some other beings might be going along those potential timelines, but they are real to those beings, as our timeline is potential to them.

Not only that, there are innumerable potential timelines behind us, as possible past events that could lead us to this here-and-now reality. We are aware of one timeline only, to which our memory is tied (except in some cases of the so-called “false memories”). Therefore, the whole picture is far more complex than to looking at “simple” 4D relativistic continuum.

Individual timelines

Now, here’s the catch: different people may have different past or future timelines! Each of these timelines is fully real to every person involved in it, while all these timelines have led all those people to the same or similar present moment (but remember: individual experience of the present time can still vary drastically). Therefore, they can remember completely different events of the same time span, yet they can still be in the same “present universe,” where their timelines merge or temporarily intersect. Their future timelines can also be very different.

Correspondingly, different people can visit their individual or collective past or future (within their minds), and yet those events can be totally dissimilar, but true to any of them.

Different people may have different past or future timelines!

​However, we cannot say this is a common case for sure. People are often inter-connected in their lifetimes because of their corresponding personality traits and lessons to be learned from each other. But those people that we only hear about from the newspaper or some TV show – their timeline can easily diverge from ours, and they may have completely different experiences of past or future individual and collective happenings. Apart from many intentional hoaxes, this can be explanation of numerous descriptions of vivid and detailed future/past events that never happened, given by some apparently mentally healthy people.

What would happen if someone influenced their own past?

Every single time-traveler will influence his/her own past, whether they physically traveled to the past and “killed their granddad,” or were just observing some past events. Remember, quantum physics is very clear about this: the very act of observing influences the behavior of the observed phenomenon, i.e. the nature of subatomic units changes from quantum waves into particles.[3] Everything is interconnected, so are observers and observed things, too.

Therefore, even the mere act of observing enacts some influence to the past event. In this way, the event has been changed, however tiny that change is.

So, in both cases, either through being physically present in the middle of some past event, or just through observing it, we would influence it. That means the time-travel paradox is the problem for both occasions. How to solve it?

There is no real paradox here. A time-traveler who would end up in the past and stayed there would have created an entirely new timeline. But it’s only an individual “bubble reality,” as it is the case with all of us. A time-traveler who would just observe some past occasion would also create another timeline, but it would probably merge with the “parent reality,” soon after his/her returning to the present.Practical notes

How can we intentionally move our consciousness along that “time coordinate” at all? What is the secret?

Some of the “visionary” people I mentioned above, the so-called clairvoyants or seers, are endowed with some secret “element” incomprehensible to us, common people. What is that?

The secret lies in our deep, subconscious attachment to this body and mind. Our body physically belongs to this cause-and-effect material universe and its physical laws, and its five senses virtually anchor it to this stream of experiences called “time.” Additionally, we are also identified with our minds and its countless thoughts, emotions, memories, beliefs, habits, etc. Those attachments make very dense veils that cut us away from a wide-ranging inner knowledge, including information on past and future, as well as on the other timelines as well. We can call them the veils of ignorance. In this case, they cut us off from our inherent abilities to move along space-time coordinates at will. However, the veils have their purpose in our lives. Without them, the “game of life” wouldn’t be possible at all.

What are these veils of ignorance, causing our total immersion into this very real „illusion”?

Basically, they are our misperceptions or unawareness of various layers of Reality. They are directly connected to our identifications, beliefs and other elements of personality, described in the Reintegration System. We think we are something else than we truly are. In fact, whatever we think we are, we are wrong. It can only be that we just are, as opposed to the notion that we are something or someone. Every single identification contributes a little bit to our immersion in this world of illusion.

Our various attachments make very dense veils that cut us away from a wide-ranging inner knowledge, including information on past and future, as well as on the other timelines as well. We can call them the veils of ignorance.

So, if we want to remove those veils, we must release our desires and fears, habits, emotions, thoughts, and many other parts of our personality. The best way to do that is to reintegrate them in a non-aggressive, benevolent way.

Luckily, these veils are usually being released spontaneously, through the reintegration of various elements of personality, layer by layer. And if they are not released yet, we also treat them with non-invasive meditative or psychological techniques, like all the other elements of personality.

If we are uncertain which element to deal with, we just have to look around us - the outer world is a projection of our inner universe. The holographic principle [4] will impeccably lead us along this path.

As our work continues, our consciousness will be expanding, while unconscious limitations are being dropped away progressively. The reintegration work will be resembling the art more and more, as the mystery of life unfolds in most surprising and beautiful ways.

The main result of such an extensive inner work can be one’s spiritual growth or enlightenment, while time travel and other extraordinary abilities can only be side-effects.

[1] Rest mass is an inherent property of elementary particles. It is the mass of a particle when at rest (its velocity equals zero).

[2] In mathematics, an imaginary number is a number that when squared gives a negative result. (If you square any Real Number you always get a positive, or zero, result. The "unit" imaginary numbers (the same as "1" for Real Numbers) is √(-1) (the square root of minus one), and its symbol is i, or j.

Source: www.mathsisfun.com/definitions/imaginary-numbers.html

[3] The best example of this behavior is the well-known “Double-slit experiment.” For more information, see article at Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

[4] Basically, the holographic principle says that each part of an entity contains complete information on the whole entity. Accordingly, within every human being, as a part of the Universe, there is complete information about the Universe. Similarly, the same correlation is between one's inner and outer reality.

More info at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holographic_principle

Trump, Xi and a dark year for democracy - Financial Times

28/12/2017

Trump, Xi and a dark year for democracy

The signals coming from the US and China generate disquiet for the global mood

GIDEON RACHMAN Add to myFT

Pro-democracy protesters march in Hong Kong as the region marks 20 years since its handover to Chinese rule from the British © AFP

Donald Trump remains a source of bafflement and confusion to the American establishment. But I felt I understood the US president better, after trips over the course of 2017 to South Africa, Turkey, Brazil and China — where politicians like Mr Trump are all too familiar. He is the loudmouth leader who is prepared to assault and undermine the institutions of his country — rather than accept checks on his power or challenges to his dignity. He is the demagogue, who is always prepared to appeal to the mob over the heads of the media. He is the swaggering president, who draws obsequious time-servers and venal chancers into his orbit. He is the man of power, all too willing to mingle his business and political interests.

The ascendance of Mr Trump — added to the growing power of China — has changed the political atmosphere around the world. There is such a thing as a global mood and the signals coming from Washington and Beijing are disquieting. The Trump administration is sending the message that the US is no longer interested in making the case for democracy and clean government. Meanwhile, Xi Jinping’s China is increasingly confident in arguing for an authoritarian model that tolerates capitalism — but crushes civil society.

The indirect effects of those signals have stoked a crisis of liberal values that is visible in places as different as South Africa, Turkey and Brazil. These three countries are significant mid-ranking powers and members of the G20 group of leading nations. Each of them, in the recent past, looked like places where liberal and democratic values were advancing steadily. Yet all of them are now struggling to maintain independent institutions that can fight corruption and check the power of political leaders. The roots of their separate crises are local and particular. But liberals in all three places feel that they are now swimming against the global tide.

The sense that hard-won freedoms are in danger was very palpable in South Africa in January — as the country waited to see who would succeed Jacob Zuma as its leader. A further decade of Zuma-style corruption could turn South Africa into a failed state. So it is a hopeful sign that the year ended with the election of the widely respected Cyril Ramaphosa as the new leader of the African National Congress.

For political liberals in China and elsewhere, it is disorientating to no longer be able to look to Washington for encouragement

The story of Turkey is far darker. Under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan — a propagator of fake news and a personality cult — the country is slipping into despotism. Mr Erdogan has used the cover of a failed coup attempt in 2016 to stage an assault on the independence of the courts and the media. Talking to fellow journalists in Istanbul in May reminded me of how fortunate I am to work free from the threat of imprisonment or persecution.

In some ways, a visit to Brazil, a few months later, provided an inspiring counter-example. Courageous Brazilian prosecutors are rooting out corruption. One president, Dilma Rousseff, has been impeached and forced from office. The current and former presidents, Michel Temer and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, are also being pursued for corruption. Yet there is a price to be paid for all this housecleaning. Public confidence in the Brazilian political system has plummeted. And support for a far-right populist, Jair Bolsonaro, is rising — and will be tested in a presidential election in 2018.

Privately, Brazilian prosecutors are worried that old practices and habits will be hard to uproot completely. They have found relatively few examples of anti-corruption campaigns that have created lasting change. One of the few that the Brazilians cite is the experience of Hong Kong under the British.

But in Hong Kong itself, there are growing fears about the erosion of the “one country, two systems” approach that China has used to run the territory since the end of British rule in 1997. This year saw the imprisonment of Joshua Wong, Nathan Law and Alex Chow, three of the young leaders of Hong Kong’s pro-democracy “umbrella movement”.

The crackdown in Hong Kong reflects the increasing authoritarianism of the government of mainland China. The 19th Communist Party congress in October saw “Xi Jinping thought” incorporated into the official ideology of the party. In China that week, there was a stark contrast between the excitement of nationalists, who felt that their country was on the move; and the near despair of liberals who could see their dream of a transition to democracy drifting ever further away.

For political liberals in China and elsewhere, it is disorientating to no longer be able to look to Washington for encouragement. In the early months of the Trump administration, the Chinese government announced that it was granting several valuable trademarks to the Trump organisation. As one head-shaking Chinese academic put it to me: “It would appear that we have just bribed the American president.”

It was a small moment. But it seemed to capture something important and discouraging about 2017.

The Next Step in Tax Reform Is Tax Repair - Bloomberg

The Next Step in Tax Reform Is Tax Repair

Republicans knew the flaws in the bill and passed it anyway. It will be up to Democrats to fix the mess.

By Noah Smith

December 28, 2017, 9:00 PM GMT+11

The job isn't finished.

The Tax Cut and Jobs Act of 2017 -- commonly known as the Republican tax reform bill -- has a number of good things in it. My Bloomberg View colleague Justin Fox has an excellent rundown. The corporate-tax rate cut was something that needed to happen for a long time, and mainly just follows the example set by other developed nations. Limits on the mortgage-interest deduction and the tax deductibility of interest payments will discourage companies and households from taking on too much debt. The limiting of deductions for state and local income taxes, although probably intended as a cynical move to tax residents of high-tax blue states like California and New York, could also be progressive in its impact.

But overall, the tax bill is a mess. Since it was rushed through Congress without extensive debate, there are probably tons of loopholes and perverse incentives in the law that will be discovered in the years to come by clever tax accountants and lawyers. These loopholes and bad incentives will need to be closed -- if not by the Republicans, then the next time the Democrats are in power.

Already, though, the broad contours of many problems are apparent. Since the GOP Congress knew about many likely problems in advance, and yet chose to pass them anyway, it’s likely that the task of fixing them will fall to the Democrats. In other words, Democratic politicians and policy advisers should already be thinking about tax repair.

The biggest problem with the bill is also one of its centerpieces -- a 20 percent deduction for pass-through business income. S corporations, limited-liability corporations, partnerships and sole proprietorships will now be taxed at a much lower rate than ordinary personal income. That opens the door for all kinds of tax avoidance. Instead of having a job, just set up a shell company and become an independent contractor; your income will now flow through the shell company, instantly lowering your tax rate without any substantive change in what you do. Of course, your employer will have to go along with the scheme, but many will, especially for highly paid employees. Already, less than half of pass-through income comes from traditional business activities, and this fraction can be expected to decrease with the new rate cut.

This amounts to a substantial income tax cut for the rich. Not only will it make the tax system less progressive, but it will create large deficits -- high earners pay an outsized share of the income taxes that make up the U.S. government’s main revenue source. Instead of focusing on cutting the top income tax rate, as in previous tax cut plans, Republicans have simply offered rich people a way around it. Big deficits will put pressure on the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates very low, in order to save the government from having to make large interest payments on its debt. That could distort the economy in ways that are poorly understood, or -- in the most extreme case -- even put the country in danger of a hyperinflation somewhere down the road.

A second problem with the tax bill involves the shift to a territorial tax system for corporations. Under the previous system, companies had an incentive to use various accounting tricks to shift profits to overseas subsidiaries in low-tax nations and hold them there for long periods of time. For a while, Congress flirted with an idea to tax profits based on where actual sales were located, which would have put an end to many such shenanigans. But instead, the final bill switched the U.S. to a system that makes the shenanigans even more harmful. Under the new system, some experts believe a company will be able to move its real operations -- factories, offices and research centers -- to another country, then book the profits in a tax haven, and end up paying almost no taxes. Not only will that reduce corporate tax revenue and increase deficits further, it will probably result in the offshoring of more U.S. jobs -- exactly the kind of thing President Donald Trump promised to halt.

A third big problem with the bill is a big cut to the estate tax. From 2018 until 2026, wealthy individuals will be able to pass on $11 million -- or $22 million for couples -- tax-free. That’s exactly the opposite of the direction that the country needs to go. The staggering rise in wealth inequality means the country needs more inheritance taxation, not less. And estate taxes are a good way of transferring money away from heirs toward people who will invest it more productively. Instead, the estate tax cut moves the U.S. even further toward a less mobile, less productive and more ossified society with rigid class divisions.

The final big problem with the tax reform bill is the repeal of the individual health-insurance mandate, a key part of the Obamacare system that has substantially increased the number of Americans with health insurance. The mandate imposed a penalty on those who failed to buy insurance, helping to bring down premium costs for those with coverage. Ending this will allow more healthy people to exit the health insurance market entirely, raising prices for everyone else.

So even before all the other loopholes and bad incentives in the tax reform bill make themselves apparent, Democrats should be thinking about fixing these four big problems. The pass-through tax rate should be raised back to the individual tax rate level. The territorial tax system should be modified so that companies can’t catch a break by shifting jobs overseas. The estate tax should be expanded, and the individual health-insurance mandate reinstated. Tax reform is a reality, but the quest for tax repair has just begun.

Beijing’s ‘distortion’ of Hong Kong Basic Law greatly undermines rule of law, legal experts warn - Hong Kong Free Press

Beijing’s ‘distortion’ of Hong Kong Basic Law greatly undermines rule of law, legal experts warn

28 December 2017 15:29 Ellie Ng

Beijing’s “distortion” of the Basic Law in justifying the Express Rail Link’s joint checkpoint arrangement has greatly undermined Hong Kong’s rule of law, legal experts have warned.

joint checkpoint co-location

Hong Kong’s senior officials answered journalists’ questions on Wednesday about the joint checkpoint plan. Photo: HKGov.

On Wednesday, China’s top legislature – the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPCSC) – approved the plan following a unanimous vote and months of controversy. Hong Kong will effectively surrender its jurisdiction across a quarter of the new West Kowloon terminus, where immigration procedures will be performed by mainland law enforcement agents.

‘Lacks legal foundation’

Some of the city’s top lawyers – Philip Dykes, Lawrence Lok and Johannes Chan – said in a joint statement on Thursday that the decision failed to justify the controversial plan with a sound legal basis.

“The current co-location arrangement is in direct contravention of the Basic Law and if implemented would substantially damage the rule of law in Hong Kong,” they said.

Legal scholars have long warned that the arrangement potentially violates the city’s mini-constitution. Article 18 states that Chinese laws are not to be applied in Hong Kong aside for those listed in Annex III, such as the national flag and emblem law.

The NPCSC decision stated that the plan would not violate the Basic Law because it concerned only part of Hong Kong, while Article 18 refers to situations where the whole of Hong Kong is affected by Chinese law. Therefore, it said, Article 18 does not apply to the mainland port of the terminus, allowing China to have full jurisdiction over the area.

The barristers’ joint statement said Article 18 was clearly written and leaves no room for any interpretation which would allow Chinese law to apply in a certain part of the SAR.

Philip dykes' list

Joint statement by Senior Counsel Philip Dykes, Lawrence Lok and Johannes Chan, and barristers Erick Shum, Randy Shek and Joe Chan, who are running for the Bar Association election. Photo: Philip Dykes’ List, via Facebook.

The decision also cited a number of Basic Law articles to support the arrangement, such as socio-economic provisions and the provision that guarantees Hong Kong a high degree of autonomy.

But the barristers said the articles were taken out of context. They said these general provisions are insufficient to override “specific and clear provisions” such as Articles 19 and 22, which state that Hong Kong has independent judicial power and that mainland personnel in Hong Kong are subject to its law.

“The rule of law will be threatened and undermined if the clear meaning of the Basic Law can be twisted and the provisions of the Basic Law can be interpreted according to expediency and convenience,” they said.

Rule of law

On Wednesday, NPSCS Deputy Secretary General Li Fei said NPCSC decisions are final and “cannot be challenged.”

In response, the former Bar chair Paul Shieh said: “No provision in the Basic Law states that anything the NPCSC decides is law in Hong Kong – if that is the case, it will be very frightening. It will be One Country, One System.”

Describing China’s view on the rule of law as “premature,” Johannes Chan said on a Commercial Radio show on Thursday that Beijing believes it can interpret the law – including its own constitution – however it likes to suit its purposes.

“This is the characteristic of Chinese law, and is exactly what we worried the most about when the Basic Law was being drafted,” the law professor said.

“The One Country, Two Systems principle was created to maintain our confidence in Hong Kong’s legal system, and the Basic Law must be interpreted according to objective standards. But now Li said there is no need to follow any rules.”

johannes chan erik shum

Law professor Johannes Chan (left) and barrister Erik Shum (right). Photo: Commercial Radio screenshot.

Barrister Chris Ng of the Progressive Lawyers Group told HKFP that his group was “very angry” at Beijing’s handling of the matter and at the Hong Kong government for allowing it to happen.

“None of the arguments are sound. The language and the way [Beijing] dealt with the issue goes against the spirit of the rule of law,” he said. “This is rule by law, or rule by decree – their words are the law, and you must accept it without question.”

“This will not only damage the rule of law, but it will also have a profound impact on the Basic Law.”

He also criticised the government for working in a black box. “Li Fei said the plan is supported by Hong Kong people, but this is not true. there hasn’t been any widespread discussion and the plan cannot realistically be said to have wide public support.”

‘Don’t take the train then’

Critics have voiced concerns over the application of Chinese criminal law in the mainland port of the West Kowloon terminus, with some worried that the Chinese authorities may take dissidents away and try them on the mainland.

Barrister Erik Shum said the scenario is not impossible. He also criticised Li Fei for telling critics to not take the train as a solution.

“The issue concerns a significant question of law, and this kind of argument is not conducive to the debate,” he said. “The main issue is not whether the arrangement is a good thing. The key is the plan must comply with the Basic Law.”

Shenzhen Bay

The government has also compared the plan with the Shenzhen Bay Control Point, an immigration checkpoint between Hong Kong and China. Part of the control port was leased to Hong Kong, thereby allowing Hong Kong law to apply in areas belonging to China.

Shenzhen Bay control point

Bridge from Hong Kong to Shenzhen Bay control point. Photo: GovHK

But Chris Ng said that the current plan is a “completely different story” and is incomparable to the Shenzhen Bay example.

Article 20 of the Basic Law allows the NPCSC to give Hong Kong additional powers, such as the power to exercise jurisdiction outside Hong Kong. Local courts have also affirmed this application of the law.

“However, the same cannot be said about China exercising jurisdiction in Hong Kong, which is not supported by any provisions in the Basic Law,” Ng said.

He said the only proper way of implementing the West Kowloon checkpoint mechanism is to amend the Basic Law in accordance with Article 159, a power that Beijing has never invoked in the history of Hong Kong SAR.

“I don’t know why Beijing doesn’t want to go through this route, but it must admit that the arrangement is incompatible with the Basic Law framework unless it is amended,” he said.

But the barrister, who represents his professional group in an alliance of around 100 civil society groups against the plan, said the fundamental issue is that Hong Kong people do not trust the Chinese legal system and its understanding of the rule of law.

“The One Country, Two Systems principle is why people are still living and doing business in Hong Kong. Without the rule of law, this policy will collapse,” he said.