Since discussion of multiverse and time travel hijacked Carl’s stellar post “Surviving the Destructive Critique” I thought I would alleviate the diminishing line commentary (those really are annoying … there must be a better way,) with a post dedicated to the conversation of multiverse and time travel. I think a discussion about creative license and technical norm divergence (AKA what-if?), would be fun. The engine of sci-fi and fantasy runs on these notions. (In my opinion, of course.)

In this iteration of MvA (Multiverse Anthropologist), I began to understand why my story lacked credibility, not only for my readers, but for me. The story is there, in my head in full cinematic entirety. Now I just need to translate from archaic, subcutaneous imagery to proper English. 

“But what about creative license?” Me ego says to meself.

Gently, because egos are so fragile, “Gov, you can be as creative as you like, but if you want people to understand you, you need some basis for them to relate.”

My ego, the self centric, gave me a blank stare. “nevermind. You keep pushing the ideas my way, I’ll polish ‘em up a bit.”

That sorted, my researcher got to work. There is still a long way to go, but thanks to input, feedback and some serious thoughtful what-ifs, here is my work-in-progress theory of multiverse and time travel:

I have learned, from theoretical physicist Kip Thorne, that gravity acts as a membrane. 

Ah, a relatable point.” 

I didn’t know, until I encountered this theory, that I was searching for a mechanism, or term, or point within the vastness of stars and theories that resonated with my own experience and level of scientific knowledge. The word membrane, took me back to my early college years of studying kinesiology (I thought I wanted to be a PE teacher like my Dad … another story for another time). There was a lot of biology and chemistry in those courses, even a cadaver. I found it all fascinating, but never knew what to do with any of it, until now.

What’s the purpose of a membrane and how does that relate to time travel and the multiverse? First lets just deal with multiverse. From the NIH National Library of Medicine I found an essay by Helen Watson entitled “Biological Membranes” (link here: Biological membranes – PMC (nih.gov)). Perfect! Now I have a clear explanation and possible mechanism for moving between verses. Thank you Helen. 

Membranes, in my head, look like Saran Wrap (and no, not the wadded up mess it becomes when I try to tear it off the roll,) as it stretches over a bowl or platter. It’s nearly invisible. Now there is a problem with this, I can see what’s in the bowl. But if an invisible membrane is separating verses, should we not “see” or perceive the other verses. That is overwhelming, and makes me think of this comment by Carl:

 “Well, this was just free-wheeling speculation. A story idea: Given an infinite multiverse, perhaps one reality is constantly shifting into another with merely a .00000001 percent difference between them–initially. Though with every passing micro-second…”

Side note thought: If only the average reader knew how deep we dig, just to make a story plausible. I suppose writing from intrinsic knowledge solidifies your own conviction of the “truth” imbuing confidence into your words and keeping your reader happily engaged.

OKAY. So my verses are possibly, somehow, saran wrapped, now what. 

I have a structure, and some basic mechanisms for manipulation of the membrane. Of course answering one question, begets a host of questions. For me, this is where research begins a dive to diminishing returns. I stop and ask, “Am I writing to the science, or am I using the science to make my story believable and credible? In this case, science does weigh heavily, so definitely 2 + 2 needs to equal 4. That’s the ‘universally’ accepted knowledge. Applying thisrationaleto membranes, the basic “known” properties should be standard, i.e. permeability, functional purpose etc. Broad properties, which in detail can be manipulated to fit my narrative. In other words, apply creative license as long as it plays within the rules of believability. If my membranes do something that membranes typically don’t do, then I run the risk of losing credibility, UNLESS, it is explained rationally, within the confines of the narrative. 

Ok, I’ve established my logic, how does multiverse operate? I believe human understanding of the Universe searches for organizational reference points. Like a library. Yes, yes “The Midnight Library” by Matt Haig. That was pretty tidy. But while a neat concept and fun story, my characters need to live, experience and remember their experiences. This brings me to time travel. A truly fascinating concept, and perhaps a component of multiverse travel with strict parameters, but as a wise man once said, “Pick one and create your world!” ~ GD Deckard

I choose Multiverse. Still, time travel dances about the subject and it does need to be addressed and put to bed. I’ll get there.

According to “Adventravia’s Verse Jump Mission Manual” 

Mission statement:

The moment life traveled from the liquid depths of earth to the rocky shores, Humans set out on the path of exploration. As each unknown is explored,  we continue our forward trajectory. Our newest frontier, The Multiverse. As Intrepid, Adventurous explorers, it is our duty to catalog our explorations for the generations who follow. The Enigmatic Multiverse has become our future for human expansion.

Humans.So caught up in our own grandeur. Anyhow, this is all that is written in the manual so far … I’m loosely using a NASA manual for shuttle missions as a template to keep it real. 

My vision: (subject to change based on new ideas and evidence)

The device Dunia creates for Verse travel, initially punched a hole in the membrane leading to some undesirable results. Further research taught her how to “gently” squeeze through the porous membranes by disguising the traveler as a “substance” that is “legal” to pass. Much like a drug interacting with a cell in the human body, the whole osmosis thing. And I’m off to brush up on cellular function.

Much like Sue and John fall back on Mathematics, I relate to biology. Chemistry is fascinating. I didn’t spend enough time in those classes, however. I see the make up of our universe from a biological stand point, while understanding that mathematics does much of the detail explaination. I think once I am comfortable with “science” of my world, I can further populate it with my cast of characters. 

I wonder? In some other verse, were Dunia and Sophia friends? HAHAHAHA.

Alright, I look forward to having my theory picked apart and questioned. 

Advertisement

40 responses to “Working through the “science” of the Multiverse.”

  1. GD Deckard Avatar

    There’s an exercise my colleagues and I sometimes present to our Ph.D. students in theoretical physics. We ask them to solve a problem by calculating the probability that one will wake up on Mars tomorrow. Quantum theory is based on what is known as Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, allowing for a small probability that we can exist even on distant places like Mars. So there’s a tiny but calculable likelihood that our quantum wave will tunnel its way through space-time and wind up there.
    – Dr. Michio Kaku

    (Unable to resist the urge to play Devil’s Advocate here)
    The best I can tell, quantum science theorizes that nothing can be known ahead of time. (We don’t know the future.) I suspect this was first evident to Neanderthals.

    I enjoy quantum discussions, but for sanity’s sake I might just hang out more with Carl. Poets and philosophers understand that “I will wake up on Mars tomorrow or I will not wake up on Mars tomorrow” is not a truth. It’s a tautology.

    As a human, I can make up something in my mind and then go see if it’s real or if it can be made real. That’s what humans do. Science does this. But as a writer, I can eliminate the middle “go see if it’s real” part altogether and simply declare that it is. I like the writer’s way. 😝

    Liked by 6 people

  2. Sandy Randall Avatar

    ” I like the writer’s way. 😝”
    With out a doubt, the path I travel most. Science adds a fun flare, but at the end of the day, what I make up and write down is the “truth” of my creation.
    Still, if I want others to buy in … I do have to give them a way in …
    ALSO, I forgot to add the link noted at the end of this sentence: From the NIH National Library of Medicine I found an essay by Helen Watson entitled “Biological Membranes”
    so here it is:
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4626904/

    Liked by 5 people

    1. GD Deckard Avatar

      Drawing analogies is my favorite way of masking the Fi in Sci-Fi.
      It lets me use something I know to lend credibility to something I don’t.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. Sandy Randall Avatar

        I love analogy. It’s the best way to achieve relatability, whatever you are doing.

        Liked by 3 people

  3. saramzerig Avatar

    You have done some interesting research here! I agree many readers likely do not appreciate all that goes into a solid science fiction tale—all that goes into most stories, really. Even my fantasy worlds not based at all in science take time to build – worlds, divine or magic systems, relationships between characters. But it’s so much fun, too. I have no holes to poke because fantasy writer, but I’ll have to check back for comments. Happy crafting!

    Liked by 5 people

    1. Sandy Randall Avatar

      Thanks Saramzerig!
      I usually write fantasy, but have found myself dipping more and more into sci-fi … I agree the research is fun. It also spawns more ideas or helps work out issues you never knew you had lol.

      Liked by 4 people

    2. GD Deckard Avatar

      I’ve read SARAMZERIG’s work, and I think I have it easier writing sci-fi. I can research (a weighty word, considering I just Google) elements of my story while she creates, makes up, every iota of her worlds, societies, families and schools of magic. Her stories are made from scratch. Her characters are fleshed out and their relationships detailed.
      I can see that a lot of work goes into good fantasy.

      Liked by 4 people

  4. Sandy Randall Avatar

    Sounds like I need to read her work too. I love well written fantasy. One day I hope to join the ranks of written well too. lol At any rate, as she puts it “But it’s so much fun, too.”
    If that’s all I do is have fun creating … I’m happy with that!

    Liked by 4 people

  5. mimispeike Avatar
    mimispeike

    “As a human, I can make up something in my mind and then go see if it’s real or if it can be made real.” This is what I do.

    “But as a writer, I can … simply declare that it is.” No, I do not simply declare it real. That’s no fun.

    I do my utmost to render any scenario semi-believable. Granted, this is easier for something set in the real world than in the Multiverse. You have plenty of at-your-fingertips detail to draw on. Detail is what puts it over.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. GD Deckard Avatar

      “Detail is what puts it over.”
      Exactly!

      Liked by 4 people

    2. Sandy Randall Avatar

      I also think you highlight the difference between fantasy and sci-fi, Mimi.
      GD writing sci-fi has a notion, pens it, googles it and finds it no where on the internet. Declaration made … astronaut claiming the moon with a flagpole … You are fictionalizing historic events with you MC as a cat. How does that work? Simply declaring Sly as true definitely doesn’t work, though he is a delightful enticement to your world. We all become Alice in Mimi’s wonderland by following the cat instead of the rabbit.
      Yes the details matter. Even GD declaring the moon his must have some relatable basis for us to believe and follow him in his wonderland.
      The problem with sci-fi and historical-fi writing, are the “known” quantities. You get those wrong, your readers are lost.
      GD’s Phoenix Diary is fantastic. I grew up in Western Colorado. I went to college (attempt 2) in NE Colorado (Greeley) I lived in Boulder, and Longmont. GD made me feel I was in a post apocalyptic version of my childhood! The point is, I totally recognized the setting. It gave the story that much more depth for me. Having lived in CO I think helped him, because I noted that his description was superior to Stephen kings in the stand. There were points when King would lose me and remind me he was making stuff up. It’s the same with movies … for whatever reason, movie companies prefer using Vancouver BC to shoot Seattle scenes. Anyone from Seattle knows the difference.

      Liked by 4 people

  6. curtisbausse Avatar

    I liked this post. And I also managed to ‘like’ it, which – if it lasts – saves me from having to ‘like’ via my email notifications, of which there are now a lot (which is a good thing – very glad to see the site buzzing!)
    I long ago adopted the principle that ‘whatever anyone says about the universe is true.’ I think astrophysicists are in clover – getting paid to make up the wildest stuff imaginable and having people believe you because, well, why not? Thus my principle makes astrophysicists of us all. It also leads to a rather blurry boundary between sci-fi and fantasy – unless one has rather strict criteria, such as fantasy having to include dragons, or sci-fi having to include time warps. My newest venture has neither but I see it as a blend of both genres. Being unversed in either, I’ve probably got it all wrong but I’m not too bothered. A huge moment of liberation came to me when, to the ubiquitous advice Read extensively in the genre you write in, I added the words ‘Do not’.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. Sandy Randall Avatar

      I think adding sci-fi is just an adjective to the larger notion that fiction is fantasy. But as you pointed out the blurry boundary, sometimes when searching for something to read it helps to narrow the field by adding some descriptors. As for the “ubiquitous advice” the phrase is wordy. Simply, “Read extensively” is all you need. Mamasquid, in her last post discusses genre angst. It boils down to writing a story. Let someone else determine the genre. It’s all fiction, unless it’s a tech manual or a text book and some of those text books … I’m willing to bet …. are more fiction than fact! lol
      To my point, the difference between sci-fi and fantasy is fluid. as I mentioned in my reply to Mimi, I qualify her fantasy as Historical-fi. Both Sly’s story and GD’s Phoenix Diary are fantasy, one is set in history, the other in the future. While Mimi’s story has recorded details, GD’s story is supposition, or what-if. Yet he also dabbles in Hi-fi in that story as well (The Sumerian dinner party). How can you really pigeonhole any of it. I think the classifying of genre’s is simply a construct to help the reader narrow down what they want to read. The writer shouldn’t bother with it and just write. For me it gives me a sense of freedom. There are no boundaries to my imagination.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. curtisbausse Avatar

        Quite right, Sandy – it can’t, or at least shouldn’t, be pigeon-holed. But pigeon-holes are the very foundation of marketing, which treats books like toothpaste or shampoo. We don’t just have hair anymore, it’s dry, greasy, rebellious, thick etc. And I say the advice is ubiquitous because the self-publishing gurus have adopted the marketers’ line, so tell us to know and research our genre as if it’s something definable and fixed. Rubbish! So yes, I’m with you all the way – no boundaries, just imagination. Now I wonder why it took me so long to realise that.

        Liked by 4 people

        1. Sandy Randall Avatar

          “Now I wonder why it took me so long to realise that.”
          Don’t worry over that point Curtis … remember Destination: Journey. From the day we are born, we are sponging up input. At some point in our lives we get a moment to look at everything we’ve soaked up and asked the question, “What’s relevant and what’s not to my own story?” It’s in that moment we can sort the rubbish from the gems. Some of us, based on our own journey, have acquired more input and therefore, more to sift through. Plus some of the rubbish comes packaged as pretty, shiny distracting baubles, their nature not immediately identifiable as useless drivel.

          Liked by 3 people

          1. Sandy Randall Avatar

            My own, of late realization, is watching those in places of power declare their superiority. I’ve started looking at them and reminding myself their trappings of power are not inherent in the fact they are born as we all are and die as we all must, but in the acquisition stuff. Basic kindergarten economics. Looking at them in this manner, brings them to equal status with me. They are no more or no less than I. I hope they enjoy their stuff as much as I enjoy mine. If not, their problem, not mine.
            Anyway … we all have our Ah-ha’s that sluff off the weight holding us back.

            Liked by 2 people

      2. GD Deckard Avatar

        You are exactly right, Sandy, Genres are marketing categories to help people browse for a book they like. But often the books I really like are too complex for simple categorization. I mean, in what genre is Gary Zukav’s The Dancing Wu Li Masters?

        Liked by 3 people

      3. Sue Ranscht Avatar

        Those are all good reasons I prefer the term speculative fiction for anything that addresses a “What if?” premise.

        Liked by 1 person

    2. GD Deckard Avatar

      to the ubiquitous advice Read extensively in the genre you write in, I added the words ‘Do not’.

      Ha! Good to know I’m not alone on that.

      Liked by 3 people

    3. GD Deckard Avatar

      “I think astrophysicists are in clover – getting paid to make up the wildest stuff imaginable and having people believe you because, well, why not?”
      😏
      If we could compare what we think of the “knowledge” possessed by people 1,000 years ago, to what people 1,000 years from now will think of our “knowledge,” we’d probably get mad.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Sandy Randall Avatar

        Or go mad … lol

        Liked by 2 people

    4. Sue Ranscht Avatar

      There are certain fantasy conventions, particularly relating to vampires and zombies, contemporary writers “debunk”. One in particular, Deborah Harkness, has created her own “realities” for vampires that do not include sleeping in coffins with their homeland soil, being turned to dust by sunlight, turning into bats, having hypnotic powers, needing to be invited in the first time they enter a home, and even being fanged. Ultimately, why should that matter, since it’s all fantasy anyway?

      The multiverse does have a more scientific cachet than vampires, but aside from the theory that the multiverse does exist, how it would work is still unknown. I think that means sci-fi authors have a great deal of freedom to make up whatever rules they want about multiverses — help me visualize what you imagine. To me the key test is whether or not a writer can make it make sense to me. As I have said before, I will willingly suspend my disbelief as long as what you write makes sense.

      In my mind, this applies to time travel, too. There are many theories about how time travel might work, but absolutely no proof there is such a possibility. A major part of the attraction I feel toward the idea of time travel is the beauty of its complexity. There are so many things to keep track of and anticipate and account for, the risk of falling into a wormhole so deep you can’t write your way out of it is ever-present. However, if an author makes an arbitrary rule that you can’t time travel to, say, a point in time before you were born or within your own lifetime, they’d better have a compelling reason other than making their job as a writer easier, or in my mind, the story has already lost my confidence. I say this with love, but as a member of an exacting and seemingly rabid population of time travel aficionados, lol.

      Liked by 5 people

  7. mimispeike Avatar
    mimispeike

    My hat is off to all who create worlds from scratch. What you do is far more difficult than what I do.

    Liked by 4 people

  8. DocTom Avatar
    DocTom

    Trying to tie down a work regarding a genre is almost a game of semantics. No matter the ‘genre’ there are always people who go ‘off trail’ as August Derleth used the phrase and try to be original. Otherwise you’re just doing what a number of folks have done before you. I googled ‘fantasy’ and came across terms I’d never seen before along with the timeless question: “Is Harry Potter high or low fantasy?” Since I really have no idea what the difference is I just moved on.

    Science Fiction is a perfect example. Originally included in fantasy, it now has become a part of ‘speculative fiction’, which I find hilarious since ‘speculative fiction’ was first coined by folks like Vonnegut who were writing what at the time would be considered science fiction but with a literary bent and were trying to differentiate themselves from pulp science fiction. The Golden Age of scifi authors (Clarke, Asimov, etc.) were followed up by authors with less of a reliance on hard science (so we now have hard science scifi and soft science scifi). Once we got to a point where there was much less reliance on science in the stories we started to get things like steam-punk, and military scifi.

    The neat thing about scifi is that while it doesn’t try to predict the future, it acts as a cautionary genre (a collection of short biographies of scifi writers is titled “Cartographers of Hell.”

    So how do you fit all this into a single genre? The craft is to write a believable story (which is why we no longer have lost civilizations on Mars). And the main trick in writing such a story is internal consistency. You need to carefully set up rules for the world you create or describe and damn-well not violate them! In a way, this is why the multiverse hypothesis has saved time travel stories. If your protagonist does something that would change time, well we’re still here because all that did was create a new timeline. Of course, you can still play the paradox game: since I’ve travelled to the past, my very presence has changed time, but I guess I always was going to travel to the past…so I didn’t change anything. Like trying to read Brian Greene’s books on string theory and quantum physics, this makes my head hurt.

    Oh well, a long way of simply saying — because your readers will pick your story apart — that consistency is the key.

    Liked by 3 people

  9. John Correll Avatar

    Sandy, I assume by membrane you refer to the Membrane paradigm for black holes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Membrane_paradigm )?

    I would assume to make this multiverse travel seem plausible; it would need to be extremely difficult. Otherwise, people would have done it ages ago. Usually, the distortion of time and gravity involves astronomical amounts of energy, like the energy trapped in black holes.

    I don’t think you need to go into detail about the process; just mention that after decades of painstaking research, Dr. Whatshername et al. developed something or other that can overcome the energy requirements and potential catastrophic pressure differentials to mimic a transitory and selectable multi-dimensional event horizon in a confined locality without imploding the solar system into a Mobius strip transform. Something like that.

    Of course, it’s always a bonus to have horrible things go wrong with the technology, like in “The Fly.” Maybe, Dunia is turned into a giant cockroach? No, maybe not. I think someone already did that.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. Sandy Randall Avatar

      Thanks John!
      Yeah there are definitely some mishaps planned… punching a hole in the membrane with brute force causes all sorts of nasty side effects… so Dunia figures out the membrane structure and also comes to realize it’s permeability… but there are rules for permeability… “the bouncer at the door doesn’t let just anyone into the exclusive club…”
      I like the Möbius strip reference… you need to read “Off to be the Wizard” by Scott Meyer … he has and interesting take on that!

      Liked by 4 people

  10. DocTom Avatar
    DocTom

    Trying to tie down a work regarding a genre is almost a game of semantics. No matter the ‘genre’ there are always people who go ‘off trail’ as August Derleth used the phrase and try to be original. Otherwise you’re just doing what a number of folks have done before you. I googled ‘fantasy’ and came across terms I’d never seen before along with the timeless question: “Is Harry Potter high or low fantasy?” Since I really have no idea what the difference is I just moved on.

    Science Fiction is a perfect example. Originally included in fantasy, it now has become a part of ‘speculative fiction’, which I find hilarious since ‘speculative fiction’ was first coined by folks like Vonnegut who were writing what at the time would be considered science fiction but with a literary bent and were trying to differentiate themselves from pulp science fiction. The Golden Age of scifi authors (Clarke, Asimov, etc.) was followed up by authors with less of a reliance on hard science (so we now have hard science scifi and soft science scifi). Once we got to a point where there was much less reliance on science in the stories we started to get things like steam-punk, and military scifi.

    The neat thing about scifi is that while it doesn’t try to predict the future, it acts as a cautionary genre (a collection of short biographies of scifi writers is titled “Cartographers of Hell.”)

    So how do you fit all this into a single genre? The craft is to write a believable story (which is why we no longer have lost civilizations on Mars). And the main trick in writing such a story is internal consistency. You need to carefully set up rules for the world you create or describe and damn-well not violate them! In a way, this is why the multiverse hypothesis has saved time travel stories. If your protagonist does something that would change time, well we’re still here because all that did was create a new timeline. Of course, you can still play the paradox game: since I’ve travelled to the past, my very presence has changed time, but I guess I always was going to travel to the past…so I didn’t change anything. Like trying to read Brian Greene’s books on string theory and quantum physics, this makes my head hurt.

    Oh well, a long way of simply saying — because your readers will pick your story apart — that consistency is the key.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. DocTom Avatar
      DocTom

      And by the way, a big thanks to Curtis. I originally posted this Sunday, and then it somehow magically disappeared (into an alternate universe?). Curtis still had the email announcing the new post, and was nice enough to send it to me. So if you like the post – thank you, but if not, blame Curtis.🤣😎

      Liked by 4 people

      1. DocTom Avatar
        DocTom

        Oh and one last thought. Today’s THE DAY! So if you haven’t done so already, wish GD a HAPPY BIRTHDAY!

        Liked by 3 people

        1. Sandy Randall Avatar

          Happy Birthday GD!🎂🍻

          Liked by 2 people

      2. Carl E. Reed Avatar

        Happy birthday, GD!
        I wish you many more– in high spirits and good health. Cheers!

        Liked by 3 people

      3. curtisbausse Avatar

        Definitely liked it, Tom, as I do this whole thread, as I’m just embarking on a journey into these various blends of genre. Reading the thread reminded me of a post by Atthys a good while back, which discusses the issue with his usual perspicacity: https://wordpress.com/posts/writercoop.wordpress.com?s=magic+science

        Liked by 3 people

        1. Carl E. Reed Avatar

          Thanks for that link, Curtis. A fine piece of writing from Atthys Gage. He’s missed here . . .

          Liked by 3 people

        2. Sandy Randall Avatar

          Thanks for posting the post Curtis. In a large sense it set my mind at ease. You wanna talk rabbit hole? When i get into researching, I find the rabbit hole. It’s a never ending spiral of weird to be sure, but it’s also an experience in getting lost in useless detail. If anything disrupts my creative process (besides all the critters in my house causing some unexpected mayhem …) it’s getting lost. Of course a dictionary will do that to me as well. Destination: Journey. I can’t wait to start reading those submissions! Come on everyone! Bring it!

          Liked by 2 people

      4. GD Deckard Avatar

        So if you like the post – thank you, but if not, blame Curtis.
        😂 You missed your call as a politician, Tom 🤣

        Liked by 2 people

    2. Carl E. Reed Avatar

      Damon Knight had as good and amusing a definition of what science fiction is as anyone: “Science fiction is whatever the editors who buy science fiction and publish it say it is.”

      Liked by 3 people

  11. GD Deckard Avatar

    Thank you, Tom, Carl & Sandy!

    Liked by 2 people

  12. GD Deckard Avatar

    Bottom line, I suspect that the science of the multiverse is half the equation. Empirical science is based on verifiable observation & measurement. The other half of the equation is the observer who measures.

    Everything we sense is filtered through our senses, made sense of in our brains, and then expressed to another person’s senses and so it all begins over again.

    Not the best system for obtaining a god-like clarity of what’s happening.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Sandy Randall Avatar

      AKA the telephone game!

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: