Interesting ideas...
Thoughts?
:<3white:


Your Brain Isn't a Computer — It's a Quantum Field
By examining our minds at a quantum level, we change them,
and by changing them, we change the reality that shapes them.


DAPHNE MULLER 18 September, 2015

Screen Shot 2019-10-17 at 1.59.05 PM.webp

The irrationality of how we think has long plagued psychology.
When someone asks us how we are, we usually respond with "fine" or "good.”

But if someone followed up about a specific event — "How did you feel about the big meeting with your boss today?" — suddenly, we refine our "good" or "fine" responses on a spectrum from awful to excellent.

In less than a few sentences, we can contradict ourselves: We’re "good" but feel awful about how the meeting went. How then could we be "good" overall?

Bias, experience, knowledge, and context all consciously and unconsciously form a confluence that drives every decision we make and emotion we express.

Human behavior is not easy to anticipate, and probability theory often fails in its predictions of it.

Enter quantum cognition: A team of researchers has determined that while our choices and beliefs don’t often make sense or fit a pattern on a macro level, at a "quantum" level, they can be predicted with surprising accuracy.

In quantum physics, examining a particle’s state changes the state of the particle — so too, the "observation effect" influences how we think about the idea we are considering.

"The quantum-cognition theory opens the fields of psychology
and neuroscience to understanding the mind not as a linear
computer, but rather an elegant universe."

In the example of the meeting, if someone asks, "Did it go well?" we immediately think of ways it did.
However, if he or she asks, "Were you nervous about the meeting?" we might remember that it was pretty scary to give a presentation in front of a group.

The other borrowed concept in quantum cognition is that we cannot hold incompatible ideas in our minds at one time.
In other words, decision-making and opinion-forming are a lot like Schrödinger’s cat.

The quantum-cognition theory opens the fields of psychology and neuroscience to understanding the mind not as a linear computer, but rather an elegant universe.

But the notion that human thought and existence is richly paradoxical has been around for centuries.
Moreover, the more scientists and scholars explore the irrational rationality of our minds, the closer science circles back to the confounding logic at the heart of every religion.

Buddhism, for instance, is premised on riddles such as, “Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without it.”
And, in Christianity, the paradox that Christ was simultaneously both a flesh-and-blood man and the Son of God is the central metaphor of the faith.

"[D]ecision-making and opinion-forming are a
lot like Schrödinger’s cat."

For centuries, religious texts have explored the idea that reality breaks down once we get past our surface perceptions of it; and yet, it is through these ambiguities that we understand more about ourselves and our world.

In the Old Testament, the embattled Job pleads with God for an explanation as to why he has endured so much suffering.
God then quizzically replies, “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?” (Job 38:4).

The question seems nonsensical — why would God ask a person in his creation where he was when God himself created the world?
But this paradox is little different from the one in Einstein’s famous challenge to Heisenberg’s "Uncertainty Principle": “God does not play dice with the universe.”

As Stephen Hawking counters, “Even God is bound by the uncertainty principle” because if all outcomes were deterministic then God would not be God. His being the universe’s “inveterate gambler” is the unpredictable certainty that creates him.

The mind then, according to quantum cognition, "gambles" with our "uncertain" reason, feelings, and biases to produce competing thoughts, ideas, and opinions.

Then we synthesize those competing options to relate to our relatively "certain" realities.
By examining our minds at a quantum level, we change them, and by changing them, we change the reality that shapes them.

Changing the metaphors we use to understand the world — especially the quantum metaphor — can yield amazing insights. Jonathan Keats, experimental philosopher, explores this thought experiment, he explains the value of interpreting metaphors literally.

Doing this, he says, will open up your mind to the workings of thought and language while shifting your perspective on myriad social normalities.
 
Interesting ideas...
Thoughts?
:<3white:


Your Brain Isn't a Computer — It's a Quantum Field
By examining our minds at a quantum level, we change them,
and by changing them, we change the reality that shapes them.


DAPHNE MULLER 18 September, 2015

View attachment 59286

The irrationality of how we think has long plagued psychology.
When someone asks us how we are, we usually respond with "fine" or "good.”

But if someone followed up about a specific event — "How did you feel about the big meeting with your boss today?" — suddenly, we refine our "good" or "fine" responses on a spectrum from awful to excellent.

In less than a few sentences, we can contradict ourselves: We’re "good" but feel awful about how the meeting went. How then could we be "good" overall?

Bias, experience, knowledge, and context all consciously and unconsciously form a confluence that drives every decision we make and emotion we express.

Human behavior is not easy to anticipate, and probability theory often fails in its predictions of it.

Enter quantum cognition: A team of researchers has determined that while our choices and beliefs don’t often make sense or fit a pattern on a macro level, at a "quantum" level, they can be predicted with surprising accuracy.

In quantum physics, examining a particle’s state changes the state of the particle — so too, the "observation effect" influences how we think about the idea we are considering.

"The quantum-cognition theory opens the fields of psychology
and neuroscience to understanding the mind not as a linear
computer, but rather an elegant universe."

In the example of the meeting, if someone asks, "Did it go well?" we immediately think of ways it did.
However, if he or she asks, "Were you nervous about the meeting?" we might remember that it was pretty scary to give a presentation in front of a group.

The other borrowed concept in quantum cognition is that we cannot hold incompatible ideas in our minds at one time.
In other words, decision-making and opinion-forming are a lot like Schrödinger’s cat.

The quantum-cognition theory opens the fields of psychology and neuroscience to understanding the mind not as a linear computer, but rather an elegant universe.

But the notion that human thought and existence is richly paradoxical has been around for centuries.
Moreover, the more scientists and scholars explore the irrational rationality of our minds, the closer science circles back to the confounding logic at the heart of every religion.

Buddhism, for instance, is premised on riddles such as, “Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without it.”
And, in Christianity, the paradox that Christ was simultaneously both a flesh-and-blood man and the Son of God is the central metaphor of the faith.

"[D]ecision-making and opinion-forming are a
lot like Schrödinger’s cat."

For centuries, religious texts have explored the idea that reality breaks down once we get past our surface perceptions of it; and yet, it is through these ambiguities that we understand more about ourselves and our world.

In the Old Testament, the embattled Job pleads with God for an explanation as to why he has endured so much suffering.
God then quizzically replies, “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?” (Job 38:4).

The question seems nonsensical — why would God ask a person in his creation where he was when God himself created the world?
But this paradox is little different from the one in Einstein’s famous challenge to Heisenberg’s "Uncertainty Principle": “God does not play dice with the universe.”

As Stephen Hawking counters, “Even God is bound by the uncertainty principle” because if all outcomes were deterministic then God would not be God. His being the universe’s “inveterate gambler” is the unpredictable certainty that creates him.

The mind then, according to quantum cognition, "gambles" with our "uncertain" reason, feelings, and biases to produce competing thoughts, ideas, and opinions.

Then we synthesize those competing options to relate to our relatively "certain" realities.
By examining our minds at a quantum level, we change them, and by changing them, we change the reality that shapes them.

Changing the metaphors we use to understand the world — especially the quantum metaphor — can yield amazing insights. Jonathan Keats, experimental philosopher, explores this thought experiment, he explains the value of interpreting metaphors literally.

Doing this, he says, will open up your mind to the workings of thought and language while shifting your perspective on myriad social normalities.
Too damn awesome.

@Milktoast Bandit I had to tag you. Read. Thoughts?
 
Too damn awesome.

@Milktoast Bandit I had to tag you. Read. Thoughts?
Yes. I like this. I've mentioned it before on the forums that science is heading in a direction that 'proves' the legitimacy of the various religions, particular the religions that have us dive into ourselves and examine every, thought, emotion and impulse. Doing this kind of examination of our lives takes us deep into our mind and heart (spiritual center) and we discover our potential to create the world around us, rather than have it create us, as well as actualize said potential.


"By examining our minds at a quantum level, we change them, and by changing them, we change the reality that shapes them."

Woop!
 
Dang, bossy!!! IDOWATIWANT!!!!
:tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy::tearsofjoy::laughing:
giphy.gif
 
"Indeed people do go places they have never been...this is closely related to remote viewing."

@Skarekrow I hope It's okay if I post this here, as to respect sweet Sandie's place..

Thanks for those vids on VELO you posted. It gave me insight on what I did wrong/might have done better maybe.

Also when it comes to remote viewing.. Hypothetically speaking if one is able to do so with ease, why bother going OOB? Like what benefits would there be? Sound?



I've had this other weird experience when it comes to seeing stuff..

This usually happens when I'm laying on bed trying to sleep but am not tired enough and thoughts keep going.

How it started was like this.. As a means to try and fall in sleep, I would close my eyes.. (for me its all black with blue/purple spots of light that move..) Then I'd try to try and see something in these spots that made sense.. following them and trying to form a picture..

Now It's like this: I close my eyes. I try to empty my mind but also instead of chasing dots I try to hold my eyes still.. after a while images start forming before me. They form slowly.. If I try to haste the process or move my eyes the image disappears.. It's kinda odd cuz I have to keep my eyes still while images float before them. It feels like I only get to see by not really caring what I get to see and being still while observing.. These images look like someone could have shot them with a camera. natural, detailed, real looking. Mostly faces and places I haven't seen or been before. I've wondered if this could be connected with remote viewing..

Also Ive had some instances where I've had a dream that didn't feel like a normal dream nor lucid nor OOBE, It felt like someone put them in my head, sent it to me..
 
"Indeed people do go places they have never been...this is closely related to remote viewing."

@Skarekrow I hope It's okay if I post this here, as to respect sweet Sandie's place..

Thanks for those vids on VELO you posted. It gave me insight on what I did wrong/might have done better maybe.

Also when it comes to remote viewing.. Hypothetically speaking if one is able to do so with ease, why bother going OOB? Like what benefits would there be? Sound?



I've had this other weird experience when it comes to seeing stuff..

This usually happens when I'm laying on bed trying to sleep but am not tired enough and thoughts keep going.

How it started was like this.. As a means to try and fall in sleep, I would close my eyes.. (for me its all black with blue/purple spots of light that move..) Then I'd try to try and see something in these spots that made sense.. following them and trying to form a picture..

Now It's like this: I close my eyes. I try to empty my mind but also instead of chasing dots I try to hold my eyes still.. after a while images start forming before me. They form slowly.. If I try to haste the process or move my eyes the image disappears.. It's kinda odd cuz I have to keep my eyes still while images float before them. It feels like I only get to see by not really caring what I get to see and being still while observing.. These images look like someone could have shot them with a camera. natural, detailed, real looking. Mostly faces and places I haven't seen or been before. I've wondered if this could be connected with remote viewing..

Also Ive had some instances where I've had a dream that didn't feel like a normal dream nor lucid nor OOBE, It felt like someone put them in my head, sent it to me..

Sure...we can take it here NP!
Thanks, @Sandie33 !!

From what I understand from experiencing and learning about the two states and others like it is that remote viewing is less like they are a separate form and more that the images come to them in their mind as pictures or other sensations.
When astral projecting you have an “astral body” which is under debate imo concerning what that is exactly...is it your soul, or is it as it suggests just a projection into some sort of avatar you create mentally in that particular space of reality?
Some say that remote viewing is putting your consciousness elsewhere, but still here on the physical plane...while astral projecting is going to another place entirely...though you also still can be here on this plane....you cannot interact or talk to people, etc.
it’s the much subtler “astral plane”.
Here’s a decent article describing the two -
https://www.astralvoyage.com/articles/astral-projection-vs-remote-viewing.php
Astral projection is placing your consciousness into the astral plane. Remote viewing is placing your consciousness into the earth plane, or what is sometimes called an "earth projection". These two planes are different in that they do not share the same vibrations. The astral is "finer" and can include a much broader range of frequencies. Whenever you have finer vibrations, the bandwidth for perception is greater (colors, sounds, entities, etc.)

When you astral project, you may or may not see other life forms, lower astral entities or higher entities. You may also detect radio and television waves. Your vision in the higher planes will include a broader range of light. None of this is the case with remote viewing. When remote viewing, you will see the same range of colors, objects, and frequencies, as you would during normal physical awareness. With astral projection, you may see "astral junk" as this is the emotional plane and form follows thought. The only "overlay" with remote viewing is that sometimes the time dimension overlaps and you will see an object that does not currently exist because it "will" exist in the future. As an example, you may see a building on a field, yet that building does not currently exist, only to find out in a few years time, the building has been built. This instance has been cited several times. This is why remote viewers have to master "time lines".

The one similarity is that time/space is independent for both forms of projection, as it has nothing to do with light and sound which are affected by vibrations. What I mean by this is, during both projections, you are able to transcend time and space.

In some ways, remote viewing is a better way to start the projection of the consciousness than astral projection. This is because you can develop the skill for remote viewing a lot quicker than astral projection. There are different forms of remote viewing as well. Regular remote viewing (viewing while in alpha), extended remote viewing (viewing while in theta) and associative remote viewing (associating objects with targets). Results can be attained with regular remote viewing in as little as several days, while conscious astral projection can take months, years, or not even in this lifetime. My step mother, a very gifted remote viewer, bi-located (projected her consciousness to the target) on her first day of learning remote viewing. I was able to bi-locate to Stonehenge on my second day of my training class. These same results are a lot harder to achieve with astral projection.

Astral projection can be exciting, once achieved, because you can go to the higher planes of the astral, and nothing near the earth's vibrations (as in remote viewing) can come close to this experience.

Unless you have a naturally loose hold over your astral body, I'd venture to say the rewards would be initially greater with Remote Viewing.

The exercise you talk about where you watch the shifting patterns behind your eyes is not that different than other techniques to start “seeing” into other realities...such as the practice of scrying....this has been done since humans existed...in water usually until they learned to make mirrors or other reflective surfaces.
Still it’s not quite the same. ;)
You could be drifting into a lucid dream - which is also really awesome to learn and do!
In that state you may not have complete control over your environment or even the dream characters, but you usually have complete control over your own autonomy.
Plus you can walk, fly, move things, create things, make things happen by will, etc.
It is really more fun in many ways than a true astral projection - which is more of a mind-blaster and has endless questions about it’s nature.
There is some kind of crossover though from astral to reality that also doesn’t exist within a lucid dream.
Though...there are exceptions and it’s really hard to concretely say that this is for sure invented by the mind and this other is not.
For example, I have met certain people I know a couple times in lucid dreams...I cannot say for certain that I was really connecting to that person in a dream, or if they were thought forms in my dream created by me.
It certainly seemed to be the former as they would seem to find lucidity for a few moments at a time when I would try to explain to them that this was a dream we were in....their eyes would clear for a minute and it seemed as if they understood.
I would then give them a keyword or a number - the two occasions that I had the chance.
Telling them to remember it when they woke up!
But then I could see their eyes glaze over again and they would go back to whatever scenario was playing out for them and off they would go elsewhere.
Admittedly, no one has yet to remember the key phrase or number either...so maybe it’s just in my head and it’s all me - maybe they couldn’t get lucid enough to remember...that is still up in the air for me. :)

I have quite a thick book on nothing but alternative realities...by no means are there just a handful of states you could fit into with your experience...just some more common and likely than others.
Had I not experienced this vibrational state as folks named it, I doubt that I would be a quick as I am to advocate attempting it as proof to yourself.
It is really there though, as are other exceptional states of mind!

Take care and much love!
 
I do hope that one day soon those of you who could benefit greatly from this are able to!
It’s really not just a bunch of mumbo jumbo...it legitimately works better than anything else out there now.
And it can work for some up to 18 months or even never again between doses!
I’m sure the drug companies don’t like that idea much....they would rather you take a handful of pills 5 times a day with painful and dangerous side-effects to boot...not to mention that new research is showing that such antidepressants like SSRIs start to blunt the emotions and empathy.
(Not saying that some people haven’t found real needed relief...it's just not nearly successful as frequently as it’s made out to be with pills like Paxil for example.)
Enjoy!!



Study:
Psychedelic drug psilocybin helps depressed patients ‘re-connect’ to the world


psychedelic-brain.jpg

New research sheds light on how psilocybin could help people overcome depressive symptoms.
The psychedelic drug appears to promote a change from disconnection to connection and a change from avoidance to acceptance.

Psilocybin is the primary mind-altering substance in psychedelic “magic” mushrooms.
The drug can profoundly alter the way a person experiences the world by producing changes in mood, sensory perception, time perception, and sense of self.

Scientists have recently starting re-examining at whether psilocybin can be used in the treatment of mental illnesses — and the initial results are promising.

“Although many of us think of psychedelics as dangerous drugs, it’s time for a rethink,” explained the study’s corresponding author, Rosalind Watts of Imperial College London. “When used carefully in clinical research settings, psychedelics have been reported to have a profoundly beneficial effect on many people’s lives. They are non-toxic, non- addictive, have very few side effects, and could potentially offer relief for people suffering from a range of psychological difficulties.”

In the current qualitative study, which was published in the Journal of Humanistic Psychology, researchers interviewed patients from a clinical trial of psilocybin for treatment-resistant depression. (The initial results of the clinical trial were published in The Lancet.)

“Working in a community mental health team, I realised that conventional mental health treatments (antidepressants, CBT) were not working for many people. I also watched my best friend struggle with depression for many years,” Watts told PsyPost.

“When she told me she was going to do an ayahuasca ceremony in Peru, I knew nothing about psychedelic therapy research, and thought it was a terrible idea. But she came back home with a sparkle in her eye that I hadn’t seen for years, and told me that the depression had finally lifted. So I thought to myself ‘this looks promising, let’s find out more.'”

A number of themes emerged after the researchers questioned 6 women and 13 men who had undergone psychedelic therapy 6 months prior.

First, the participants described depression as a state of disconnection, which was reversed with psilocybin.
Secondly, the psychedelic treatment helped them confront, process, and accept painful memories and thoughts.

Thirdly, they described previous depression treatments as reinforcing the disconnection and avoidance they felt — while psilocybin worked in the opposite way.

“The reset switch had been pressed so everything could run properly, thoughts could run more freely, all these networks could work again. It unlocked certain parts which were restricted before,” one participant explained.

“I got a wider perspective, I stepped back. It helped me appreciate that the world is a big place that there’s a lot more going on than just the minor things that were going on in my head,” another participant told the researchers.

A third remarked: “My previous treatments, talking therapy and meds, were next to useless, utterly useless. My experience of psilocybin has been very positive. I believe there is an unknown physiological and neurochemical change in me, I am absolutely convinced of that.”

Or as another participante summed it up: “Now there’s a greater sense of ‘we’re all in the same boat’; less unease.”

There were no serious adverse events reported during the psilocybin sessions.
But a few participants had troubling psychological experiences which resolved themselves before the session was over.

A few participants also wished they had received more psychotherapy following the drug session.

“The psychedelic experience is not to be taken lightly,” Watts explained. “Participants in our study found psilocybin therapy to be preferable to other treatments they had tried, but that does not mean it was easy. Many of them had experiences of deep grief, sadness and fear, and relied upon the support of their ‘guides’ to enable them to fully accept and process these emotions. If any psychologists are interested in volunteering as a ‘guide’ they can get in touch at ros.watts@yahoo.co.uk.”

“It’s very early days: the sample sizes are small, and we need to determine the role of placebo effects. Randomized control trials in the United States (John Hopkins, NYU) have started to address the question about placebo effects with similar promising findings. Upcoming randomized control trials in Europe will continue to investigate.”

The study, “Patients’ Accounts of Increased “Connectedness” and “Acceptance” After Psilocybin for Treatment-Resistant Depression“, was also co-authored by Camilla Day, Jacob Krzanowski, David Nutt and Robin Carhart-Harris.

Listen to Rosalind Watts discuss psilocybin treatment below:





.
 
The only "overlay" with remote viewing is that sometimes the time dimension overlaps and you will see an object that does not currently exist because it "will" exist in the future. As an example, you may see a building on a field, yet that building does not currently exist, only to find out in a few years time, the building has been built. This instance has been cited several times. This is why remote viewers have to master "time lines".

Ive had this one instance where I saw this side scrolling picture of a street that formed slowly. There was a boy present, older than he is at the moment. The vibe and detail of the picture made me think it could be a time and place in the future. But that just sounds surreal

The exercise you talk about where you watch the shifting patterns behind your eyes is not that different than other techniques to start “seeing” into other realities...such as the practice of scrying....this has been done since humans existed...in water usually until they learned to make mirrors or other reflective surfaces.
Still it’s not quite the same.

Intrigued..

You could be drifting into a lucid dream - which is also really awesome to learn and do!
In that state you may not have complete control over your environment or even the dream characters, but you usually have complete control over your own autonomy.
Plus you can walk, fly, move things, create things, make things happen by will, etc.
It is really more fun in many ways than a true astral projection

Didn't feel like a drift into lucid.. Theses feel different in that I feel very awake. I might see flashes of several pictures that get interrupted. To me a drift into lucid feels more like an effortless smooth transition without any interruptions.

For example, I have met certain people I know a couple times in lucid dreams...I cannot say for certain that I was really connecting to that person in a dream, or if they were thought forms in my dream created by me.

I might have had that happen once.. The other person claimed to have dreamt the same thing.. but no way to confirm..

It certainly seemed to be the former as they would seem to find lucidity for a few moments at a time when I would try to explain to them that this was a dream we were in....their eyes would clear for a minute and it seemed as if they understood.

interesting..

Admittedly, no one has yet to remember the key phrase or number either...so maybe it’s just in my head and it’s all me - maybe they couldn’t get lucid enough to remember...that is still up in the air for me.

I'd say keep it up, who knows what will happen in the future. Guess I could try this too might the occasion arise..


Thank you @Skarekrow for taking the time sharing your knowledge.
:<3black:
 
Ive had this one instance where I saw this side scrolling picture of a street that formed slowly. There was a boy present, older than he is at the moment. The vibe and detail of the picture made me think it could be a time and place in the future. But that just sounds surreal



Intrigued..



Didn't feel like a drift into lucid.. Theses feel different in that I feel very awake. I might see flashes of several pictures that get interrupted. To me a drift into lucid feels more like an effortless smooth transition without any interruptions.



I might have had that happen once.. The other person claimed to have dreamt the same thing.. but no way to confirm..



interesting..



I'd say keep it up, who knows what will happen in the future. Guess I could try this too might the occasion arise..


Thank you @Skarekrow for taking the time sharing your knowledge.
:<3black:

Glad to help!
Hope that all makes more sense.
You could really look at remote viewing as clairvoyance for all intents and purposes...like a mental image, a vision, a knowing, etc.
Where going OOB is either A.) your actual soul in some form able to move independently of the physical body...or B.) like the term “astral projection” infers, you are projecting some kind of energy avatar that you can move your consciousness to and control...so, not like a mental image at all in that regard.

Yes....same here, I can tell when it’s a lucid dream...I tend to not even actively acknowledge it to myself sometimes though I am lucid...as if it’s commonplace and I don’t care - which isn’t true about my feelings toward it when awake per say...so it’s weird that the importance and strangeness that one imagines one might feel in a lucid dream is not there when it’s taking place. ;)
This could however be interpreted as not being fully lucid, but still acknowledging somehow that I’m in control maybe, idk?
There are so many various levels of consciousness and types of variations on it...one doesn’t have to look far to see that our brain fills in the blank about a lot of missing information it doesn’t have.
lol
And then there are things like magic mushrooms that create a completely different level of brain function - the thing that always fascinates me about that is the fact that they seem to be tailored to effect one region while suppressing another region - specifically the DMN, the seat of the ego, the overactive bitch that causes anxiety and depression, addictions, etc.
Everything else is hyper connected...except that...too coincidental if you ask me.

It’s rare that I will have both a lucid dream and it also contain someone who I know and am able to get them lucid too.
There have been times where they seem to get clear-eyed for a moment or two and seem to realize what’s happening...but then they seem to drift back into whatever dream scenario is playing out for them...but yes...whenever I get the chance I try.
There is one of my favorite studies I posted several pages back on the OOB excursions of the study's author....very intriguing stuff...let me find it...
NDE Implications from a Group of Spontaneous Long-Distance Veridical OBEs
Here is a link - https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/43...108.42825825.1571717936-1769125141.1571717936

This gives you a much better idea of how you can and can’t move while OOB when compared to a lucid dream or mental image while remote viewing.

Take care man!
Cheers!
:<3white:
 
Last edited:
Catch up with you all very soon.
Give me a couple days.
 




71710183_740736936367223_2263631817225535488_n.webp


Not sure how accurate these two cat memes are...you be the judge. ;)
72432489_748631798911070_1130110847398445056_n.webp



72488855_748631745577742_7691803208955461632_n.webp



74361069_2726103447440687_1106915910876135424_n.webp



75388420_752186511888932_7280225748634304512_n.webp



72920874_2723505514367147_8547560552031846400_n.webp


 
More proof in the pudding...

“The greatest skeptic concerning paranormal phenomena is invariably the man who knows the least about them.”
~ H.H. Price

Enjoy!


Testing for Telepathy in Connection with E-mails

Email-Sign.jpg

The following abstract is from the peer-reviewed Perceptual and Motor Skills journal article Testing for Telepathy in Connection with E-mails (2005, 101, 771-786) by the eminent psychical thinker, Dr. Rupert Sheldrake and Pamela Smart.

In this abstract, Sheldrake and Smart succinctly detail various scientific methods in telepathic research and if available, the results from the researchers who conducted or analyzed the data and the statistical significance of said data are included.

Ultimately, they outline a new method of telepathic research: e-mail.
Like any journal article, in addition to the abstract contained herein, they outline their methods, results and conclusions so other researchers can continue to experiment via this new method of research.

Over the course of this abstract, Sheldrake and Smart touch on a few major studies on telepathic research.
Dream telepathy and Ganzfield experimentation have both undergone a meta-analyses to definitively demonstrate statistical significance towards the existence of telepathy.

The authors also mention a prior experiment conducted by Sheldrake on telephone telepathy and the results were highly significant.

The telepathy via e-mail experiments that are the subject of this paper are built upon the foundation that was laid by Sheldrake with his telephone telepathy experiments.

The results of telepathy via email have a higher statistical significance that the telephone telepathy garnered.

Sheldrake and Smart are demonstrating in this abstract that there is empirical data which points to the existence of telepathy.
Telepathy is not just a belief, it can be tested scientifically.

More important, the results are consistently coming in with statistical significance that is higher than what would be expected by chance (as written about in this separate article).

So please take a couple minutes for yourself to read this abstract and if you feel so inclined to learn more about this, the original paper can be found on Rupert Sheldrake’s website.

Abstract for “Testing for Telepathy in Connection with E-mails”:
Telepathy has been investigated scientifically for more than 100 years, but its existence is still controversial.
Some people believe telepathy and other forms of “extrasensory perception” (ESP) or psi are impossible in principle (e.g., Humphrey, 1995)..

Hence, they suggest that all the evidence for telepathy must be flawed and should be treated with extreme skepticism.
Others regard the question as empirical.

Maybe telepathy really occurs, even if the means by which it operates is not yet understood. Its existence or nonexistence is not a matter of belief but of evidence (e.g., Henry, 2005).

Meanwhile, many people claim that they themselves have had telepathic experiences, and several surveys have shown that a majority of the population thinks telepathy exists (Gallup & Newport, 1991; Blackmore, 1997; Sheldrake, 2003).

Skeptics usually dismiss all personal experience as unreliable.
Only experimental evidence counts.

From the 1880s to the 1940s, the most popular experimental method for the study of telepathy and other forms of ESP involved card-guessing tests. During this period, 142 published articles described 3.6 million such trials, with statistically significant, positive hit rates for which the average effect was small, i.e., less than 2% above the level expected by chance (Pratt, Rhine, Smith, Stuart, & Greenwood, 1966).

In the 1960s and 1970s, there was a new approach involving controlled studies of dreams.
Could people pick up images telepathically when dreaming in a laboratory, while a “sender” in another room concentrated on a randomly chosen image?

In a meta-analysis of the 25 published studies on dream telepathy, covering a total of 450 trials, the overall hit rate was significantly above chance expectation (Radin, 1997).

In parapsychology laboratories since the 1970s, the prevalent method for investigating telepathy has involved a mild form of sensory deprivation, called the Ganzfeld, in which participants sit in a relaxed state in dim red light with halved ping-pong balls over their eyes.

In another room, a “sender” concentrates on a picture or video clip, selected at random from a pool of possible targets.
After the session is over, the participant is shown four pictures or video clips and asked to pick one which most closely corresponds to impressions he may have received during the test session.

By chance, participants would select the target picture roughly one time in four, with a hit rate of 25%.
A meta-analysis published in 1985 covering 28 studies showed an overall hit rate of 37% (Honorton, 1985).

A published meta-analysis of the same data (Hyman, 1985) again showed that the odds against chance were very high.

Hyman and Honorton together drew up a set of guidelines for further research, which they published in a “joint communiquéé” (Hyman & Honorton, 1986). They recommended rigorous precautions against sensory leakage, extensive security procedures to prevent fraud, full documentation of all experimental procedures and equipment, and complete specifications about what statistical tests were to be used to judge success.

Following these recommendations, a broader range of investigators in several laboratories carried out a new series of computer-controlled automated Ganzfeld experiments over the following years.

In a meta-analysis (Bern & Honorton, 1994) of the results from 354 auto-Ganzfeld sessions, the average hit rate was 32% (effect size 0.28, p < .01).
But in 1999, a meta-analysis of data from 30 auto-Ganzfeld trials showed no significant effect (Milton & Wiseman, 1999).

However, Milton and Wiseman excluded from their analysis a recent series of studies from Edinburgh University.
When these were included, overall hit rates were again significantly above chance (Milton, 1999).

A more recent meta-analysis also yielded significantly above-chance hit rates (Bern, Palmer, & Broughton, 2001).

Unfortunately, the Ganzfeld procedure bears little resemblance to apparent telepathy in everyday life.
Also, in most Ganzfeld and other tests on telepathy in parapsychology laboratories, the “senders” and “receivers” were strangers, whereas apparent telepathy in real life generally takes place between people who know each other well (Sheldrake, 2003).

We have been exploring a new way of investigating telepathy experimentally that is more “ecological,” in the sense that it is closer to common experience and involves “senders” who are friends or family members.

One of the most common kinds of apparent telepathy occurs in connection with telephone calls (Sheldrake, 2000, 2003; Brown & Sheldrake, 2001).
Most people claim to have had experiences in which they think of someone for no apparent reason, then that person calls; or they know who is calling when the phone rings before picking it up; or they call someone who says “I was just thinking about you!”

Many people have had similar experiences with e-mails (Sheldrake, 2003).

An illusion of telepathy could be created if people remembered when someone called (or e-mailed) soon after they thought about that person but forgot all the times that they thought about someone who did not contact them.

Also, an illusion of telepathy could arise if the person had an unconscious expectation that someone he knew well would call or e-mail, based on an implicit knowledge of that person’s behavior.

Until recently, there were no scientific investigations of telephone telepathy to test these hypotheses.

Over the last few years we have investigated telephone telepathy experimentally (Sheldrake & Smart 2003a, 2003c). In our tests, a participant received a call during a prearranged period from one of four potential callers.

Participants were asked to choose callers from among their friends or family members.
Callers and participants were usually several miles away from each other, and in some cases thousands of miles apart.

On a given trial, the participants knew who the potential callers were but did not know which one would be calling.
The caller was picked at random by the experimenter.

When the telephone rang, the participant guessed who was calling before the other person spoke.
The guess was either right or wrong.

By chance, participants would have been right about one time in four.
For a total of 571 such trials on telephone telepathy, involving 63 participants, the average hit rate was 40%, significantly above the 25% expected by chance.

The effect size was 0.35 (Sheldrake & Smart, 2003a).

We then carried out a second series of tests under more rigorous conditions, with the participants videotaped continuously.
Their guesses were recorded before they picked up the telephone.

In a total of 271 trials, 45% of the guesses were hits (effect size .45) (Sheldrake & Smart, 2003c).
In a recent replication at the University of Amsterdam the hit rate was also significantly above chance (Lobach & Bierman, 2004).

In a test filmed for a British television show, the hit rate was 50%) (Sheldrake, Godwin, & Rockell, 2004).

In this paper, we describe a series of tests for telepathy in connection with e-mails following similar procedures.
Our primary objective was to find out if hit rates were at or above chance levels.

Our secondary objective was to investigate whether there was a difference in hit rates with familiar and unfamiliar e-mailers.
Surveys have shown that telepathy mainly occurs between family rnembers and close friends.

In our experiments on telephone telepathy, hit rates were significantly higher with familiar than with unfamiliar callers (Sheldrake & Smart, 2003a, 2003c).

 
You could really look at remote viewing as clairvoyance for all intents and purposes...

I still haven't researched clairaudience either.. Guess I'm just lazy if I can't figure out a positive constructive outlet for it.. Or have no passion towards it.

I tend to not even actively acknowledge it to myself sometimes though I am lucid...as if it’s commonplace and I don’t care

I know I'm lucid when I feel like a God

This could however be interpreted as not being fully lucid, but still acknowledging somehow that I’m in control maybe, idk?

maybe.. what you said about kicking your legs opening your eyes.. I started going lucid as a little boy.. The nightmares were scary at first.. I learned early to pinch my eyes closed and force them open if shit got too wild.. Guess at times though, especially as a newb this was as far as my powers reached.. But at times it's like I'm just watching a movie but know I could change it it at any moment

And then there are things like magic mushrooms that create a completely different level of brain function - the thing that always fascinates me about that is the fact that they seem to be tailored to effect one region while suppressing another region - specifically the DMN

I aint got no experience with any of that
 
@GRiMM
I still haven't researched clairaudience either.. Guess I'm just lazy if I can't figure out a positive constructive outlet for it.. Or have no passion towards it.

Well, just consider it a “sense” like any other, though you may not be actively aware of it or how to use it at this point.
You can choose not to place much time into such endeavors...that is a personal choice that is neither right nor wrong - just as you said, if you have no passion toward a thing, unless you must learn it for this or that reason...focus on the things you really love.
That’s where our schools have it backward...instead of finding and encouraging the things that the individual child is good at or interested in at the very least - they drill the shit you aren’t good at into your head over and over and over, focusing on the bad grades in certain subjects instead of the good grades in others.


I know I'm lucid when I feel like a God

Yes, when you have total control, those are nice...

maybe.. what you said about kicking your legs opening your eyes.. I started going lucid as a little boy.. The nightmares were scary at first.. I learned early to pinch my eyes closed and force them open if shit got too wild.. Guess at times though, especially as a newb this was as far as my powers reached.. But at times it's like I'm just watching a movie but know I could change it it at any moment

I had similar experiences but there were a few factors that contributed to an already scared little boy not unlike yourself.
We lived in a haunted house when I was a child...like a legit one...I finally got my Mom to admit it a while back after all these years!
“Oh...well there was that time this really loud, deep, groan came out of the bedroom you and M were in! Of course you were too little to have made such a noise.”
“And you didn’t move us to the other bedroom Mom?”
“Well, haha, no.”
*sigh*
I know about forcing my eyes open from night terrors...oftentimes I would wake in the night to toys moving in my bedroom...and my parents/brother definitely saw it on at least two occasions.
The first time it happened it didn’t register for a while what that noise was or what was going on....then this realization dawned on my in the middle of the night that R2D2 was grinding it’s wheels in the styrofoam form inside the box - right under my head, under the bed.
I ran screaming from that room for the first time of many.
Anyhow...back on topic...I would have lucid dreams but then it would spit me out into an OOBE.
I would wander around my house trying to get my parents to talk to me and just feeling generally terrified.
Whatever was in that house made a certain sound before it would pop into that reality and I would have to get back to my sleeping self really fast or it would be too late.
It was this loud electrical/buzzing/power-line sound...electrical cracking...
Which years later was consequently the very same sound I would hear while purposefully inducing an astral projection/OOBE from meditation while in the vibrational state...so it has to be related somehow.
When I heard that again after so many years...it freaked me out for a week or so and I stopped trying during that time...but eventually bit the bullet and decided to keep going...the sound returned along with a cacophony of other noises while I can now look back on my childhood experiences with some insight.
Such as this sound of a party going on behind a door...I would hear this very often as a child and never thought it was significant other than I would try to find those people I heard when I was in trouble sometimes to no avail...they weren’t around anywhere.
So both of those sounds I now know are heard when exiting or projecting.
I would have horrible dreams in that house too...lucid dreams like you talk about...those went on for years, I would force my eyes open too, or kick my leg out like I said...and really didn’t fully go away completely until we moved when I was 11.


I aint got no experience with any of that

And that’s okay.
:)

Take care!
:<3white:
 
Last edited:
Quantum Physics: The Physics of Dreaming

Quantum-Light.png

This article, edited for brevity, contains key excerpts from a much larger essay penned by Paul Levy.
You can find the entire article at his Awaken in the Dream website.

These excerpts focus upon quantum theory and the hard problem of consciousness.
As we previously posted in our March 2019 monthly reference article list, observation has been proven to be subjective via quantum experimentation.

So the question must be asked, are we interpreting reality subjectively as it is presented to us or are we creating our own reality every moment?
Allen presents information that begs exploration of this question and many more.

“What we call reality is simply a theory and internalized mental model which is at bottom a way of looking at the world,
rather than a form of absolutely true knowledge of how the world ‘really’ is.
However we view it, we can’t get around the fact that we are participating in creating our experience of the universe.”

– Paul Levy, Quantum Physics: The Physics of Dreaming​

Key Excerpts from Quantum Physics: The Physics of Dreaming

In discovering the quantum, physics has indisputably encountered consciousness.
Quantum physics is pointing out, in unequivocal terms, that the study of the universe and the study of consciousness are inseparably linked, and that ultimate progress in the one will be impossible without progress in the other.

The discovery of the quantum nature of our universe is a seismic, tectonic shift in the very foundation of physics and the roots of our scientific worldview, a change so momentous that it can literally transform the course of human history.

The founders of quantum physics, people such as Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg and Erwin Schrodinger famously argued that quantum physics is first and foremost a new way of thinking.

Quantum theory is teaching us that implicit in our very thinking are certain flaws and misperceptions that, unseen and taken for granted, unnecessarily limit our ability to apprehend the nature of nature, including our own.

Quantum physics is the most subversive of all the sciences, having created a “reality crisis” in the field of physics such that the very idea of “reality” itself has been undermined.

Physicists have, in their attempts at grasping its implications, lost their grip on reality, finding nothing to hold onto.
Exploring the farthest reaches of the outside micro-world brings us right back to our inner selves.

One third of our economy involves products based on quantum mechanics – things such as computers and the Internet, lasers, MRI’s, DVD’s, microwaves, mobile phones, silicon chips, semiconductors, superconductors and nuclear energy.

And yet, even with the huge impact quantum physics has had on all of our lives, this effect is infinitesimally small compared with what it will be when more of us recognize and internalize the implications of what it is revealing to us about the nature of reality as well as of ourselves.

This is the deep philosophical question that begs to be answered – what does quantum physics mean?
And do we use the discoveries of quantum physics for the betterment of our species, or to destroy ourselves?

Quantum theory reflects back to us that the choice is truly ours.

Participatory Universe

Quantum physics forever shattered the idea of there being an objectively existing world.
It is ironic that physics, long considered the most “objective” of all the sciences, in pursuing its dedicated quest to understand the deep nature of the material universe, has dispelled the very notion of an objective universe.

Quantum theory has opened up the door to a profoundly new vision of the cosmos, where the observer, the observed and the act of observation are inseparably united.

In quantum physics, we are no longer passive witnesses of the universe, but rather, we unavoidably find ourselves in the new role of active participants who in-form, give shape to and in some mysterious sense “create” the very universe we are interacting with.

In essence, consciousness has entered into the physics laboratory, and physicists are not quite sure what to make of this.

Coming to terms and facing up to the intrusion of consciousness into their hallowed halls is forcing physics to come to terms with questions of meta-physics, which for most physicists is not what they signed up for.

Quantum physics is itself the greatest threat to the underlying metaphysical assumptions of “scientific materialism,” a perspective which assumes that there is an independently existing, objective material world that is separate from the observer.

The quantum revolution has revealed that the classical worldview was something that existed entirely within the minds of a certain strain of European humanity that became reified into an orthodox creed and held the mind of modern humanity in a prison of its own making, as if humanity had become spellbound.

Physicists themselves haven’t fully comprehended and don’t quite know what to make of what they have unwittingly stumbled upon.
They have been forced to wrestle, not just intellectually but emotionally, existentially and spiritually with their own discoveries in the quantum realm.

Quantum theory has pushed its adherents to the very edge of the unknown, both out in the world and within themselves.
In trying to understand nature, physics is helping us discover our own nature.

In re-visioning our idea of the world we live in, we change our perception of the possibilities available in our world, thus opening up previously unimagined pathways of creative and effective action.

“Objective reality” is now an unexamined implicit assumption, an idea in our mind.
What most of us call objective reality is simply an interpretation of data whose meaning is agreed upon by the majority, what can be called a “consensus reality.”

Reality

Quantum theory brings the question to the fore: Are we discovering reality, or creating it?
And if we are, at least in part, creating what we call reality, what are we creating it out of?

According to our subjective experience the world certainly seems real enough, apparently contradicting what quantum physics is telling us about the world’s lack of inherent, objective reality.

In the overwhelming majority of cases, the world behaves “as if” it has an independent reality, which furthers our visceral belief in objective reality.
Yet objectivity itself is a recent human phenomenon.

The Scientific Revolution was a deepening of our powers of reason, a flowering of human creativity and a breakthrough for humanity, helping us to explore our world in ever-more profound and ingenious ways.

From another point of view, the Scientific Revolution was also the onset of a particular form of madness.
It started as a new worldview that was revolutionary in its power; yet it contained a subtle error that solidified into a widespread delusion which has over time profoundly enabled the collective psychosis that our species finds itself in.

An essential feature of this madness is the severing between the subject and object, the observer and the observed, as if the scientific imagination thought that in its intellectual examination of the world, it wasn’t part of, participating in, and thereby affecting that which it was investigating.

Seeing the world as separate from ourselves has become the prevailing and institutionalized worldview of “the academy,” a viewpoint that takes the heart, soul and “magic” out of the world, reducing it to a dead, inanimate, insensate domain.

This was done in pursuit of the ideal of objectivity, which was gradually elevated to the level of an absolute truth about the nature of reality.
This approach worked remarkably well when it came to dealing with the macroscopic world, enabling unprecedented levels of control to be exerted over the physical world.

But an unseen cost was being incurred by the human spirit.
Increasingly enthralled by science’s ever-growing achievements and technological wizardry, few questioned whether these very advances might at the same time be leading humanity astray from essential aspects of the true nature of our being, slowly dehumanizing our species in the process.

In contrast, quantum theory implies that immaterial factors having more of the nature of images and ideas are the blue-print for our universe, actually in-forming and shaping the evolution of the universe as a whole.

It is as if the universe itself is conspiring with us to help us awaken to its, and our nature, and quantum physics is the theoretical and experimental “instrument” for this deeper insight to reveal itself. S

een as a symbol crystallizing out of the dreamlike nature of reality, quantum physics is revealing to us that we don’t live in the mechanistic, Cartesian world of classical physics, but rather, inhabit an enchanted world not separate from our mind’s creative imagination.

What we call reality is simply a theory and internalized mental model which is at bottom a way of looking at the world, rather than a form of absolutely true knowledge of how the world “really” is.

It is important not to conflate reality with our theories, not to confuse the map with the territory.
Our best models are no more than aids to our imagination, by no means are they complete reflections of the nature of reality.


“If quantum mechanics hasn’t profoundly shocked you, you haven’t understood it yet.”

– Neils Bohr​

The Laws of Physics

Quantum physics has raised the question, is the ever-evolving universe like a work of art in progress, making up its laws as it goes along?
The idea that the laws which inform the functioning of reality spring into manifestation out of nothingness fully formed is a nonsensical, preposterous idea.

As one quantum physicist comments, “The laws of physics were not installed in advance by a Swiss watchmaker.”
They must have somehow come into being.

The central and all-encompassing role of the observer in quantum mechanics, what has been referred to as the “magic ingredient,” is the most important clue we have regarding the construction of the universe.

The universe gives rise to meaning-establishing observer-participants, who, in developing the ideas of quantum mechanics, grant a meaningful existence to the universe.

The construction of the universe is such that the observer is as essential to the creation of the universe as the universe is essential to the creation of the observer.

In a world without a built-in purpose, quantum theory “promotes” the observer to the definer of reality and generator of meaning, which is essentially a creator of distinctions, a primordially creative role.

However we view it, we can’t get around the fact that we are participating in creating our experience of the universe.

Quantum physics is riddled with paradox to its core.
Thinking “quantum-logically,” we are able to hold paradox in a new way; instead of needing one or the other viewpoint to be true, in a higher form of logic, we can hold seemingly contradictory statements together as both being true simultaneously.

This gives new insight into how what may appear to be contradictions at one level can be part of a deeper consistency and completeness from a higher, more inclusive level.

As renowned quantum physicist John Archibald Wheeler once said, “The universe gives birth to consciousness, and consciousness gives meaning to the universe.”

The emergence of consciousness in the universe is as epic and epochal an event in cosmic history as the first big blast of its materialization in the supposed big bang.

In this process of self-cognition, the universe is able to turn back upon itself so as to explore its nature via its various life forms.

In such a self-referential cosmology whose nature is a self-generating feedback loop of pure creativity, we are dreaming up the universe, while at the same time the universe is reciprocally dreaming us up.

The seemingly subjective and objective realities interblend and co-create each other.
As observers, we are participants in the genesis of the universe.

Cosmogenesis

Without observers, there is no existence.
The observer is both a result of an evolutionary process and, in some sense, the cause of its own emergence.

In other words, mind-boggling as it is to contemplate, we may be “observer-participants” playing a role in the genesis of the cosmos in this very moment. We live in a universe that is capable not only of harboring life, but of cultivating life which is intelligent enough to ask about its origins.

In our observing and reflecting upon our universe we are actually changing the universe’s idea of itself.
Through us, the universe questions itself and tries out various answers on itself in an effort – parallel to our own – to decipher its own being.

Quantum physics has discovered that there are no elementary particles, no fundamental “building blocks” of reality.
“The atoms or elementary particles themselves form a world of potentialities or possibilities rather than one of things or facts.”

They are not located in time or space but in an abstract realm.

Subatomic objects don’t exist as things, but rather, as events, as happenings, as dynamic ever-changing interactive psycho-physical processes.
What these elementary entities “are” and what they “do” are inseparably intertwined.

The aspects of nature represented by quantum theory are converted from elements of “being” to elements of “doing,” which basically replaces the world of material substances with a world populated by actions, events and processes.

In the quantum world, there is no “place” for matter, in the same way that in the classical world there is no “place” for mind.
Classical physics’ theory of a world of matter is converted by quantum physics into a theory of the relationship between matter and mind.

Unveiling a great mystery, quantum physics is pointing out that the ultimate nature of the universe is more mind-like than matter-like.

The quantum universe can be properly conceived of only as an intricately interconnected dynamic whole.
Our universe is an emergent universe in which the whole is greater than the sum of any of its parts can even imagine.

An emergent global property can feed back to influence the individuals who produced it in an interlocking, creativity-generating, self-sustaining and life-supporting feedback loop.

Thus individuals and groups can begin to consciously tap into the energy that makes up the quantum realm – the zero point energy of creation itself – in a way which changes everything.

Our nonlocal universe’s spooky action-at-a-distance is an expression of the fundamental, indivisible wholeness of the universe, which is radically different from classical physics’ previous conception of the universe as composed of separate parts.

At the quantum level, there is the radically new notion of intrinsic unbroken wholeness, a seamless interconnectedness among all of the universe’s seemingly separate parts.

At the quantum level, the universe is “one” with itself.

A Physics of Possibilities

Quantum entities exist in a realm of potentiality, in what is called a state of “superposition,” which is to say they hover in a ghostly state between existence and nonexistence, existing in all possible states up until the moment they are observed.

Not existing in space-time, their appearance in space-time at the moment of observation is a quantum event in which an atemporal process manifests in time.

Everything ultimately exists in a state of open-ended potential.

In the transition from the random uncertainty of the quantum realm, where particles ceaselessly spring into and out of existence, to the seeming solidity and orderly certainty of our everyday world, the question naturally arises, where is this boundary between the quantum world, where things don’t actually exist in a real way but in a state of potentiality, and our everyday world, where things at least appear to exist in a solid-seeming way?

Quantum theory implies that the whole universe – including ourselves – is recreated and recreating itself anew every based on how we are dreaming it up.

What we experience is not external reality, but our interaction with what our minds construe to be an external reality.
Quantum reality is not subjective, just as it is not objective.

The quantum dimension is the bridge, the intermediate realm between the subjective mental realm “in here” and the seemingly objective world “out there,” somehow coupling the two.

Rather than the quantum realm being illusory, quantum physics points out that the appearance of the macroscopic, conventional world can be likened to a holographic optical illusion produced by the interaction of our sense faculties with quantum reality.

Behind the apparent solidity of everyday objects lies a world of open-ended potentiality.

It is not that the deeper reality is veiled and we can’t know it; rather, there is no deeper, independent reality based on our ordinary conceptions of what this means.

The further we descend down the quantum physics rabbit hole, the more magnificent the plumage of this very strange quantum bird.
In the quantum realm we never end up with things, but always with interactive relationships.

At the quantum level, being and knowing, perception and reality, epistemology and ontology are inextricably entangled.

The viewpoint that is emerging from the cutting edge of quantum physics is that, instead of being an epiphenomenon of matter, consciousness is the ontological ground and driving force of the process of reality itself.

Max Planck, the first person to propose the quantum nature of light and one of the first architects of quantum theory, commenting on what the new physics was revealing to humanity, famously said, “Mind is the matrix of all matter.”

Consciousness is in some mysterious fashion creating the “stuff” of the material world.

The discovery of the quantum observership-based nature of reality represents the first rupture in the armor of the classical chrysalis that has long encased the human mind and fettered the human spirit, tightly holding it in a state of slumber dreaming of a deterministic, clockwork cosmos.

Irreversibly awakening out of its somnambulistic trance, humanity is going through an evolutionary metamorphosis in which it is unfurling its iridescent wings of creative imagination as it flies into the open-ended space of previously undreamt possibilities, releasing itself into the luminous imaginal sky of freedom.

Key Points
  1. There is no objective reality independent of an observer.
  2. We live in a participatory universe. The observer affects what is observed by the mere act of observing.
  3. Quantum entities exist in a multiplicity of simultaneous potential states (called a superposition), hovering in an abstract realm between existence and nonexistence prior to being observed.
  4. There is no independent quantum entity separate from its properties. Its properties are a function of our observation. This is to say that these quantum entities aren’t real in the way we ordinarily think of something as being real.
  5. The act of observation is the very act which turns the potentiality of the quantum world into the actuality of the seemingly ordinary world.
  6. Our act of observation not only changes the present state of the universe, it reaches backwards in time and changes what we can say about the past. This turns our conception of linear time and causality on its head.
  7. The questions we ask make a difference.
  8. The universe is a seamless, undivided and instantaneously interconnected whole. This is to say that each part of the universe is interrelated with every other part in an immediate and unmediated way.
  9. An expression of this wholeness is the universe’s nonlocality, in which every part of the universe is related to and in communication with every other part. Our universe doesn’t play by the typical rules of third-dimensional space and time.
  10. Quantum entities can jump from one place to another without traversing the path in-between.
  11. The laws of physics are not written in stone, but are mutable.
  12. The quantum universe is not separate from consciousness; rather, it is an expression of consciousness. Mind and matter are no longer seen as separate.
  13. Our ordinary, day-to-day universe is quantum through and through.
  14. Quantum physics literally changes and transforms our mind, as it introduces a new way of thinking. It also helps us see the world differently, which helps the world to manifest differently.
  15. Quantum physics is showing us how we ourselves are moment by moment playing a key role in the creation of our experience, as well as in the genesis of the cosmos, in this very moment.
  16. Significantly altering Descartes’ famous principle, “I think therefore I am,” quantum physics would instead say, “I choose therefore I am.”
  17. Quantum physics is a revelation in living form: it is showing us the dreamlike nature of our universe.

A pioneer in the field of spiritual emergence, Paul Levy is a wounded healer in private practice, assisting others who are also awakening to the dreamlike nature of reality.

He is the author of Dispelling Wetiko: Breaking the Curse of Evil (North Atlantic Books, 2013) and The Madness of George W. Bush: A Reflection of Our Collective Psychosis.

An artist, he is deeply steeped in the work of C. G. Jung, and has been a Tibetan Buddhist practitioner for over thirty years.
Please visit Paul’s website www.awakeninthedream.com.

You can contact Paul at paul@awakeninthedream.com; he looks forward to your reflections.
Though he reads every email, he regrets that he is not able to personally respond to all of them.
 


56b4d893e0e9695fe9c77f70b177f7c2.jpg






dc258d64a03970c32ff70a54f29d077d.jpg





b2eb02dfe8a8ac0e5d307b32b6597858.jpg





140e147151aea10e2bda10df523537a7.jpg





8d6e0c93b03252d8590d2b67a68fd80d.jpg





addc55177a2d9d4988d006e86a381e66.jpg






de16ddcc213c6f8fad8479f2e24c5768.jpg

 
Back
Top