The Brain’s Autopilot Mechanism Steers Consciousness


Freud’s notion of a dark, libidinous unconscious is obsolete. A new theory holds that the brain produces a continuous stream of unconscious predictions

The Brain's Autopilot Mechanism Steers Consciousness

In Brief

Research on the unconscious mind has shown that the brain makes judgments and decisions quickly and automatically. It continuously makes predictions about future events.

According to the theory of the “predictive mind,” consciousness arises only when the brain’s implicit expectations fail to materialize.

Higher cognitive processing in the cerebral cortex can occur without consciousness. The regions of the brain responsible for the emotions and motives, not the cortex, direct our conscious attention.

In 1909 five men converged on Clark University in Massachusetts to conquer the New World with an idea. At the head of this little troupe was psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud. Ten years earlier Freud had introduced a new treatment for what was called “hysteria” in his book The Interpretation of Dreams. This work also introduced a scandalous view of the human psyche: underneath the surface of consciousness roils a largely inaccessible cauldron of deeply rooted drives, especially of sexual energy (the libido). These drives, held in check by socially inculcated morality, vent themselves in slips of the tongue, dreams and neuroses. The slips in turn provide evidence of the unconscious mind.

At the invitation of psychologist G. Stanley Hall, Freud delivered five lectures at Clark. In the audience was philosopher William James, who had traveled from Harvard University to meet Freud. It is said that, as James departed, he told Freud, “The future of psychology belongs to your work.” And he was right.

The view that human beings are driven by dark emotional forces over which they have little or no control remains widespread. In this conception, the urgings of the conscious mind constantly battle the secret desires of the unconscious. Just how rooted the idea of a dark unconscious has become in popular culture can be seen in the 2015 Pixar film Inside Out. Here the unconscious mind of a girl named Riley is filled with troublemakers and fears and housed in a closed space. People like to think of the unconscious as a place where we can shove uncomfortable thoughts and impulses because we want to believe that conscious thought directs our actions; if it did not, we would seemingly have no control over our lives.

This image could hardly be less accurate, however. Recent research indicates that conscious and the unconscious processes do not usually operate in opposition. They are not competitors wrestling for hegemony over our psyche. They are not even separate spheres, as Freud’s later classification into the ego, id and superego would suggest. Rather there is only one mind in which conscious and unconscious strands are interwoven. In fact, even our most reasonable thoughts and actions mainly result from automatic, unconscious processes.

The Predictive Mind

A revolutionary, and now widely accepted, countermodel to Freud’s scheme goes by the term “predictive mind.” The theory comes in different flavors, but overall it holds that automatic processes play a central role in the mind, allowing us to predict events quickly and accurately as they arise. Learning, experience and consciousness constantly improve our implicit, or unconscious, predictions, and we take note of events only when the predictions fail. That is, we become conscious of circumstances when they merit our attention. This automaticity enables us to function smoothly in the world, and becoming conscious when predictions fail enables us to avoid the pitfalls of automatic processing and adjust to changes in our environment. In a simplified example, unconscious processes predict the trajectory of a ball tossed to us and adjusts our limb motions accordingly. Conscious processing would become engaged, however, if the ball took a sudden right-angle turn.

Like the popular conception of the embattled mind, the predictive mind perspective is rooted in 19th-century precursors. Physicist and physiologist Hermann von Helmholtz was the first to hypothesize that the conclusions we arrive at automatically are anchored in perception. Our visual system, for example, readily produces an imaginary triangle out of three strategically placed circles with slices cut out (illustration). According to Helmholtz, such useful illusions proved that preprogrammed mechanisms shape our image of the world without our doing anything at all. The predictive mind model now hypothesizes that this automaticity shapes not only our perceptions but all mental processes, including our judgments, decisions and actions.

The Kanizsa triangle illusion provides evidence that our perception is based on implicit inferences. Our visual system constructs an imaginary triangle as a way to “explain” the arrangement of the circles.

To physically function smoothly in the world, you need your brain to quickly and automatically distinguish between the body’s own actions and external inputs. It accomplishes this feat by creating a so-called efference copyof each command it sends to muscles. When you shake your head back and forth, for example, you know that the external world is not rocking back and forth even though the visual cues reaching the brain might give that impression, because the efference copy indicates that the brain itself gave the motion commands. The efference copy is also the reason you cannot create the same tickle sensation in your own foot that others can induce: when the tickling sensation at the sole of your foot is processed, the areas of the brain responsible for perception of touch are already well informed that your own fingers are doing the job.

The workings of unconscious processes are also evident in a wide variety of other phenomena, such as automatic movements, spontaneous associations, jumping to instant conclusions (an example of what scientists call “implicit inferences”) and perception of subliminal stimuli (those not consciously recognized). Laboratory experiments have shown that test subjects recognize the rule underlying a particular task before they are able to verbalize the rule. In one study design, for example, volunteers are asked to draw cards from two stacks, one that could bring huge hypothetical profits but also massive losses and one that is less risky; the volunteers are not told of the difference between the stacks. Signs of stress, such as increased sweating, will reveal that the subjects sense the pattern—the difference between the stacks—long before they can articulate that one of the piles is risky. As neuroscientist Nicolas Schuck of the Max Planck Institute for Human Development in Berlin has recently demonstrated, such implicit inferences affect activity in certain parts of the frontal lobe—where decisions are often said to be made—even before the test subjects make their decisions.

The Power of Subliminal Stimuli

Research using a subliminal intervention called priming provides further examples of the ways unconscious processing influences behavior. Experimenters present images, words or even physical sensations in such a way that test subjects either will not notice the stimuli (because the exposure is too brief) or will disregard them (because they presumably have nothing to do with whatever is being focused on). In an example of the latter strategy, psychologists may ask subjects to read texts in which certain words appear multiple times without the words being highlighted and ask control subjects to read a neutral text. If the test subjects display measurable differences in thinking, feeling or acting after reading the text with multiple occurrences of the word, researchers can assume that the text had an unconscious effect.

Numerous studies have demonstrated that subliminal stimulation involving concepts such as aging or death have measurable consequences on behavior. Test subjects move more slowly, for example, or become more responsive to spiritual ideas. The phenomenon is familiar in everyday life. Passing a bakery, people may suddenly remember that they forgot to get the ingredients for a birthday cake. Our unconscious paves the way for our actions.

Such examples confirm that the brain functions along multiple tracks. Compared with a computer, our gray matter chugs along very slowly—but on many parallel levels. Researchers often distinguish between two general strands, however. Nobel laureate in economics Daniel Kahneman calls them System 1 and System 2. Others speak of implicit and explicit or hot versus cold processing. The first strand (System 1, implicit, hot) refers to the rapid, automatic and uncontrollable workings of the unconscious mind; the other strand (System 2, explicit, cold) describes the slow, more flexible conscious processes that are subject to volition. But what is key in the predictive mind conception of mental functioning is that these two strands always work in tandem; in other words, our mind operates both unconsciously and consciously.

The following sentences illustrate the truth of this assertion: Veery nmoral sopern acn dpeciher eseth drows. Talhoguh het telters rae ramscbled, ouy houlsd vahe on ficudiflty unstanddering thaw si geibn dias. Ouy anc od hist ecabuse fo het sursingpri mautoaticity fo het brian! Most people will take only a fraction of a second to become aware of what the next word must be. The autopilot in our brain anticipates the words and quickly sorts the scrambled letters.

A big riddle is what precisely distinguishes conscious from unconscious processes at the neurophysiological level—and how exactly they interact. According to philosopher Peter Carruthers of the University of Maryland, College Park, we are aware only of the material in our working memory: the “user interface,” so to speak. But working memory holds only a vanishingly small fraction of the data we take in. We remain unconscious of most of the input that floods the brain—and feeds System 1, which processes it automatically and quickly.

What does the brain do with these data? It constantly peers into the future, considering, What will happen next? What stimuli are likely to come up? Anything dangerous on the horizon? What are others up to? Such prognostications relate not only to the outer world but to the internal milieu of our bodies. Seen in this light, our desire to eat is nothing more than the unconscious anticipation of an impending loss of energy. Our unconscious aims to maintain homeostasis, to keep our body (including the balance of energy intake and use) in a steady state.

Predictive Neurobiology

Mark Solms of the University of Cape Town in South Africa, who is a strong proponent of the predictive mind theory, has added other insights to the neurobiological basis of unconscious and conscious functioning. In contrast to Freud, he argues that our mind is not seeking greater consciousness but rather the opposite—to keep consciousness to a minimum. As he explains, “You know the Talking Heads song where ‘heaven is a place where nothing, nothing ever happens’? Well, that’s the brain’s preferred state because it is energy- and time-efficient. It’s a survival mechanism.”

In 1909 a delegation of psychoanalysts, including Sigmund Freud (bottom row, left) and Carl Gustav Jung (bottom row, right), attended a conference at Clark University in Worcester, Mass., organized by Stanley Hall (bottom row, center). Freud delivered five lectures.
Solms described this idea in a 2018 paper co-authored with Karl Friston of University College London, a key figure in the development of the imaging techniques that have so revolutionized brain research. About 10 years ago Friston introduced the free energy principle, a mathematically formalized version of the theory of the predictive brain. In his definition, free energy in the brain describes the neuronal state that results from the brain’s failure to make a correct prediction; the brain does all it can to avoid free energy. In the final analysis, Solms and Friston assert, predictive errors equal surprise equals consciousness; when things do not work as expected, we get consciousness—a state the brain tries to limit.

This perspective not only stands Freud’s theory on its head, but it also contradicts the classic view that the cortex (the outer layer of the cerebrum) is the source of consciousness. According to Solms, these higher regions are not the bearers of consciousness but instead are “told” what to attend to by deeper structures in the brain stem and midbrain. Solms locates the source of consciousness in the areas of the brain that regulate alertness, emotional stimulation, and drives—precisely those areas where Freud located the unconscious (brain illustration). “The pattern-detection mechanisms of the cortex work most efficiently without conscious attention. It is the deeper, emotional parts of the brain, the limbic structures, from which consciousness arises,” he says.

This hypothesis can be empirically confirmed. Children who as a result of developmental disorders were born without a cerebral cortex are capable of forms of consciousness, for example. Such infants, if they survive into childhood, are not only alert but display emotional reactions. In a 2007 review, neuroscientist Björn Merker concluded that numerous conscious phenomena occur even without a cerebral cortex. Although more complex mental operations such as logical thinking or self-reflection are not possible, emotions such as joy, annoyance or sadness can be experienced.

The brain’s outer rind—the cerebral cortex—is the seat of higher mental functions in traditional views of the brain. But in a model proposed by Mark Solms of the University of Cape Town in South Africa, consciousness arises from activity in lower regions, such as the reticular activating system, the ventral tegmentum and the thalamus. For instance, sensory information—all of which passes through the thalamus—becomes conscious only when it is emotionally or motivationally relevant, in which case the prefrontal and the cingulate cortex direct our attention to it. Meanwhile the striatum and the precuneus play a role in automatic movement control and orientation, which enable us to interact with our environment without giving it a conscious thought. Credit: Falconieri Visuals

The Real Mastermind

Many people stubbornly cling to the old distinction between the instinctive unconscious and rational consciousness, with a preference for the latter. But, as I have shown, this view is untenable. Unconscious processes greatly control our consciousness. Where you direct your attention, what you remember and the ideas you have, what you filter out from the flood of stimuli that bombard you, how you interpret them and what goals you pursue—all these result from automatic processes. Timothy Wilson of the University of Virginia considers this reliance on the unconscious to be the price that we pay for survival as a species. If we were forced always to consider every aspect of the situation around us and had to weigh all our options about what to do, humankind would have died out long ago. The autopilot in our brain—not consciousness—makes us what we are.

The real mastermind that solves problems and ensures our survival, then, is the unconscious. It is understandable that people tend to distrust the unconscious, given that it seems uncontrollable. How are we supposed to be in control of something when we do not even know when and how it influences us? Nevertheless, the arrangement works.

John Bargh of Yale University, who studies priming, compares the human mind to a sailor: To steer a boat from point A to point B, a sailor needs to know the destination and be able to make course corrections. Such abilities are not sufficient, however, because, as is true of the unconscious, uncontrollable factors such as ocean currents and wind come into play. But expert sailors take them into account to arrive at their destination.

We do well to treat our unconscious similarly—by not getting in its way. And that is really what we do day in and day out. When I put a picture of my loved ones on my desk to fuel my motivation for work or when I take the stairs instead of the elevator, I am steering my unconscious mind, recognizing that its desires for leisure and rest do not serve my best interests at the moment. And the fact that I am able to do this shows that the conscious and the unconscious are partners rather than opponents.

Mind Over Matter — Consciousness and the Nature of Reality


Reality is not what it appears — the ancients knew it, pioneering physicists of the early 20th century knew it, and current leading edge scientists are proving it — all is mind.

The Big Questions and the Modern Scientific Worldview

Throughout the ages, Mankind has been trying to answer the big questions — What is the nature of existence and reality, what are we, and why are we here?  In our current age, with the ascendance of the ideology of scientific materialism, we have a strong tendency to reject anything that doesn’t fit our materialistic paradigm and label it as “mystical”.  We have become mesmerized by the material world.  Materialism and consumerism run rampant in our society. Lured by the apparent success of the reductionist method that we have used to analyze and understand our world, we have come to view the universe as purely a physical system, working something like a great machine, and with matter being the fundamental substance of reality.

“The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence.” — Nikola Tesla

Our scientific analytical methods have certainly been successful and have led us to understand the inner workings of matter well enough to create many useful technologies.  But these successes have erroneously led us to conclude that our materialistic view of the universe must be correct and reject other ideas as “mystical” and backward.

The materialistic paradigm persists in the popular and scientific thought despite plenty of evidence that it is indeed not true.  The Theory of Relativity and Quantum Physics have both shown that energy is more fundamental than matter.  The pioneers of quantum physics in the early 20th century — Max Planck, Albert Einstein, and others — all came to the same conclusion — that everything is energy and that somehow consciousness is intimately intertwined with it.  And yet this insight seems to have been lost since then.  Physicists are still chasing the fundamental “particle”, and focusing on material phenomena rather than focusing on what energy is, how it forms matter, and what other forms can it take.

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

 

And modern science is still largely ignoring the role of consciousness, despite the observations of quantum phenomena that strongly suggest that consciousness is intimately related to the nature of reality.  Mainstream science continues to assume that reality is objective, EG; that it exists independent of the consciousness of the observer despite much evidence to the contrary, and the conclusions of many pioneers of physics.

The accomplished English physicist, astronomer and mathematician, Sir James Jeans, had this to say:

“I incline to the idealistic theory that consciousness is fundamental, and that the material universe is derivative from consciousness, not consciousness from the material universe… In general the universe seems to me to be nearer to a great thought than to a great machine. It may well be, it seems to me, that each individual consciousness ought to be compared to a brain-cell in a universal mind.” — Sir James Jeans

And he wasn’t alone, below Max Plank shares a similar viewpoint.

“I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.” — Max Plank

Reality is Not What it Appears

“There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” — Shakespeare, from Hamlet

Consciousness is probably the most mysterious and significant phenomena in the universe, so to treat it as irrelevant to understanding reality is a major mistake.  In fact, there have been some very profound experiments (see this video about these experiments) that leave very little doubt that there is an intimate relationship between consciousness and reality.  Leading some to conclude that consciousness is the fundamental substance of the universe, as many esoteric and mystical philosophies throughout the ages have claimed in one way or another.

It’s not surprising that we might get stuck on the idea that matter is the fundamental substance of reality because this idea is just a natural consequence of our perceptual limitations.  Our sensory apparatus — sight, hearing, smell, touch — provide us a useful representation of the external world, but when it comes to our primary sensory channel, vision, it is well known that we are “seeing” only are very narrow band of energies.  Our eyes detect electromagnetic energy frequencies and convert them to the images and colors that we perceive.  But our eyes only detect an extremely small portion of those frequencies, less than 0.00018%.  And we are only “seeing” the clumps of energy condensed to a slow vibration (EG; matter).  We can’t see all the rest of the energy and how everything is interconnected patterns of energy.

“All matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration.” — Bill Hicks

Despite the lesson that the unseen phenomena of electromagnetic radiation should be teaching us we are still largely unaware of how the limitations of our sensory apparatus have conditioned our models of reality.  There are many more unseen phenomena we have yet to detect and understand.  Our visual perceptions are far less complete than we have ever imagined, and this has led to a tenacious conceptual bias that has colored our models of reality.  This bias is interfering with formulating a broader, deeper more accurate model including tackling the big question we’ve been avoiding — what is consciousness and how it is related to reality.

Ancient Cosmological Philosophies — All is Mind

Long before our current scientific age, and for much longer, there were many cultures with a vastly different view of the cosmos.  They saw the universe as intelligent and alive in it’s very fabric; they thought of the cosmos as a great mind, and that our earthly reality was in some sense a grand illusion.  Philosophy continues to explore the nature of reality and consciousness and debate many alternate perspectives.  Among contemporary schools of thought, there are those that resonant with the ancient idea that “all is mind”.  This idea has not been lost completely.

“The stream of knowledge is heading toward a non-mechanical reality; the universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine. Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter, we ought rather hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter. Get over it, and accept the inarguable conclusion. The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.” — Sir James Jeans, Physicist

Science was born from philosophy but it has long since gone its separate way — science focusing on how things work and FACTS and philosophy focusing on MEANING. This is why humanity has lost its heart and it’s soul — facts without meaning are like a ship without a rudder.

Modern science would have us believe that life, consciousness, and intelligence somehow emerged from the mechanizations of the universe by random chance, however improbable. That they were essentially accidents, and hence have no deeper meaning. Yet there are those who believe that it is all deeply meaningful and by design, and hence purposeful.

The Primordial Energy Field and The Emergence of Consciousness

Modern science is beginning to embrace that all is energy and is moving towards a unified energetic field theory, but they still have no clue how deep the rabbit hole goes.  When they figure out the deeper intricacies of atomic energetics and molecular and bio-molecular energetics amazing advancements in technologies will be possible.  And as this unfolds they will begin to realize that consciousness is a process in the energetic field and we will finally bid farewell to the materialistic view of reality that’s has dominated our thinking for so long.

Exactly how consciousness could emerge in the energetic field is unclear but a branch of information and computational theory may ultimately have the answer.  Cellular Automata Theory claims that highly complex and organized patterns and dynamics can emerge from very simple systems containing discrete cells, with a small sets of states, and rules that govern how nearby cells are affected.  And this structure has an interesting similarity to the base predicates of a number of obscure but compelling unified field theories (Zero Point Field Theory, Reciprocal System Theory, and others).  Presumably one of these complex dynamical patterns is the process of consciousness itself — the omni-present intelligence and awareness that permeates the energetic field, the fabric of the universe.

For a very interesting account of the scientific discoveries that have been unfolding over the past twenty years or so related to the energetic field and it’s connections with consciousness check the book The Field: The Quest for the Secret Force of the Universe.

There are a number of groups doing scientific study of consciousness related physical phenomena and their findings are very interesting.  Explore these organizations and their work to dive deeper into this subject; the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research Laboratory, the International Consciousness Research Laboratories, the Global Consciousness Project, and the Institute of Noetic Sciences.  An effort related to the Global Consciousness Project that is about to be launched is the Global Consciousness App.  Check out the video below about this interesting App and project.

Everything is Energy, and Thoughts Are Energy

According to Guy Needler, in his book The History of God, consciousness emerged in a small part of the universal energetic field and gradually increased in awareness until it was fully sentient.  At that point it decided to explore what it was by experimenting with what it could do.  It quickly realized that its thoughts created energy patterns in the field that it existed in.  It also discovered that it could divide its consciousness and focal point of awareness into many smaller parts and perceive from many different perspectives at the same time.  We are each a one of these divisions.  We are all threads of the universal consciousness, and it is experiencing everything we are experiencing.

In the universal mind thoughts are patterns of energy, and these patterns of energy are everything we see — light, matter, galaxies, stars, planets — and everything we can’t see.  And there’s a lot more going on in the part that we can’t see than most of us imagine.  The space that we think of as the one Universe, and with one reality actually holds many parallel realities, which are often referred to as the dimensions or planes of reality.

Because source consciousness is creating all that is with it thoughts and each of us is a thread of source consciousness, our thoughts are also creative.  We don’t realize this because we have forgotten what we are, but we are creating our reality with our thoughts, on an individual and collective basis, all the time.  This is not obvious because our thoughts are erratic and undisciplined, hence our creation is undirected and incoherent.  If we embrace our creative power and consciously master our thoughts, we will begin to create coherently.  And then it will become obvious that we are indeed creating our reality and we’ll begin to create the life of our dreams, and collectively the world of our dreams.  Check out my article Are You Creating Your Reality? Manifesting 101 to learn more about conscious creation, often called manifesting.

“A fundamental conclusion of the new physics also acknowledges that the observer creates the reality.  As observers, we are personally involved with the creation of our own reality.  Physicists are being forced to admit that the universe is a “mental” construction.” — R.C. Henry, Professor of Physics and Astronomy

Within the Mind-Scape

All that is — the galaxies, stars, planets, light, matter, you and me — everything we can see, and everything we can’t see are the inner workings of the cosmic mind — the universe is conscious in its very fabric, and we are inside of it!  This consciousness, in fact, encompasses many universes and a vast number of parallel realities.  It is the source of all that is, including our own consciousness and that of every sentient entity in the universe.

We exist in a mindscape, a realm of ideas made manifest.  We exist inside of a cosmic mind that is creating a multitude of environments and experiences to explore all the possibilities of existence and expand its understanding of self.  It is all constructions of thought within the cosmic mind. You are a construct we call a person, and you are within a construct that we call the universe and the world.  You are a vehicle that source consciousness is experiencing through.  You are an aperture that it is using to look out onto, and experience, one of the many environments that it has created.

You are a focal point of source consciousness’s awareness looking out from inside of one of its own thoughts and experiencing them.  Through its thoughts, it is forming a multitude of parallel realities, and then diving in and exploring them, experiencing them.  All realities, all worlds, are INNER WORLDS.  This why it is said that to know thyself and know the truth you only need to GO WITHIN. Everything is within the unbounded mind of source consciousness, and it is all within you because you are it.  You are a thought within a thought within a thought experiencing itself.

“We are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves.” — Bill Hicks

“All that we see or seem, Is but a dream within a dream.” — Edgar Allen Poe

The Universal Mind is Infinite, and What It Can Create is Limitless

The universe is infinite simply because it is a conceptual space, a realm of ideas and imagination, which makes it inherently unbounded.  What it can create is only limited by its imagination, and it’s imagination is limitless.

“Logic will get you from A to B. Imagination will take you everywhere.” — Albert Einstein

Each and everyone one of us is a part of this infinite mind, and we all potentially wield its unlimited creative power because we are it.  The only thing that limits us is our beliefs and imagination! Wake up to what you truly are and be amazed at what you can create.

We are limitless!

HOW FLUORIDE AFFECTS CONSCIOUSNESS AND THE WILL TO ACT


New evidence has linked fluoride and other chemicals to brain disorders. What other unknown effects might this industrial by-product added to our water supply have? An examination of water fluoridation’s shadowy history reveals potentially disturbing ramifications for human consciousness.

Recent research has brought the controversial practice of water fluoridation back into the spotlight, revealing links between water fluoridation and brain disorders, particularly in regard to its effect on children.

Troublingly, the report found that side-effects do not only come from direct ingestion by children, but also from higher levels of chemicals such as fluoride in expectant mothers’ blood and urine, which was linked to brain disorders and lower IQs in their children. In many cases, the changes triggered can be permanent. This evidence flies right in the face of spurious claims by skeptics that ingestion of fluoride in low concentrations has no harmful effects on our health.

Is it any wonder then that only seven countries in the world actually fluoridate more than 50 percent of their water supply? Although it is often portrayed in America as if every country does it, this is very far from the truth. In fact, the United States accounts for more than 50 percent of all the fluoridated water drinkers in the world, while the vast majority of European countries for example avoid this practice altogether.

So what is fluoride and why do a few countries continue to infuse their public drinking water with this controversial chemical? What ramifications might its side effects have for human development?

How Water Fluoridation Came to Be

Although there is widespread acceptance that fluoride is toxic in high doses, a trend emerged in the twentieth century to add this chemical to drinking water at dosages deemed to be “safe.” Where did this trend originate?

It may surprise you to hear that apparently the first occurrence of purposefully putting sodium fluoride into drinking water took place in the German ghettos of the 30s and 40s, and shortly thereafter in Nazi concentration camps.* Clearly, the Nazis would not be concerned with the strength and resilience of their prisoners’ teeth; so, what could be the real reason to fluoridate the water? What effects does it really have upon us? And why are countries such as the United States still doing it?

Let’s now look at how water fluoridation started in America. An industry researcher from the Mellon Institute financed by the Alcoa Company first recommended water fluoridation in America in 1939. Seeing as Alcoa had toxic waste, a bi-product from aluminum otherwise known as fluoride and stood to benefit from finding a way to sell and dispose of it, could this really be a coincidence? The report convinced dentists and the public at large that water fluoridation is good for our teeth. With this, whether intended or not, the industry gained a way to get toxic waste off their hands, and moreover, even be paid to get rid of it—by selling it off to be dumped into the public water supply.

In 1946, an attorney and former counsel to Alcoa was appointed to head the U.S. Public Health Service. Shortly thereafter, he ensured that the water fluoridation “experiment” passed essentially unchallenged and unchecked by any real public study or research and was soon given a $750K private bonus from Alcoa. In today’s dollars, that’s worth anywhere from $6.89 million to $55.3 million, depending on how you account for inflation.

But some people have identified a more sinister agenda behind water fluoridation that goes beyond apparent greed and convenience. At the end of World War II, Charles Elliot Perkins, a researcher in chemistry, biochemistry, physiology, and pathology, was sent to Germany to take charge of their chemical plants. He later wrote in response to what he had seen and heard while there: “The real purpose behind water fluoridation is to reduce the resistance of the masses to domination and control and loss of liberty … Repeated doses of infinitesimal amounts of fluorine will in time gradually reduce the individual’s power to resist domination by slowly poisoning and narco-tizing this area of the brain tissue, and make him submissive to the will of those who wish to govern him.”

How Fluoride Suppresses Consciousness

Pineal gland parenchyma with calcifications. Attribution: Wiki User Difu Wu.

But how does a chemical bi-product dumped into the water supply actually work upon those who ingest it over time? There are many ways sodium fluoride consumption affects our bodies, but one aspect we’ll focus on in this article is that sodium fluoride calcifies the pineal gland. British scientist Jennifer Luke published a study which found that fluoride deposits tended to accumulate in the pineal gland and calcify it. In addition, a 450 page review on fluoride toxicity published by the National Research Council in 2006 reported that fluoride produced a range of negative side effects including “decreased melatonin production” and “other effects on normal pineal function, which in turn could contribute to a variety of effects in humans.”

Not just scientists, but mystics too have explored the effects of the pineal gland within us (from different angles): physically, it plays an important role in regulating sleep patterns and sexual development; spiritually, it is said to be a connection between the body and the soul, and is referred to by some as our “third eye.” Either way, when the pineal gland is calcified by sodium fluoride, it obviously cannot function properly. This could have grave effects both physically and spiritually upon humanity.

There is more to the human body than its physical apparatus. This is widely evident in phenomenon such as near-death experiences, whereby people have had accounts of experiencing existence while their brain and body has been clinically dead. However, while we are here physically, the spiritual components depend upon the physical apparatus in order to function properly and thereby communicate and actively participate in the physical world. When an important seat of consciousness such as the pineal gland cannot function properly, by logical extension, consciousness itself cannot function properly within us, since the physical means with which it functions in the world has been damaged.

Thus, it is not only that fluoride consumption has adverse health effects and reputedly makes people easier to control (as the Nazi’s believed), but the very spiritual essence of who we are, our consciousness, can be hindered from manifesting in our lives. Within our consciousness are all the spiritual feelings such as love, peace, happiness, and freedom, as well as mystical experiences and psychic faculties. The consciousness gives us the ability to be “here,” “awake,” and present psychologically.

There are sinister agents in the world and beyond who wish to see consciousness suppressed. There appears to be an evil behind water fluoridation that runs deeper than mere convenience, and the implications go beyond fluoride’s reputed effects of making a people compliant who would otherwise question questionable things (such as water fluoridation – the irony notwithstanding). On the deepest level, it’s about a person’s individual ability to awaken consciousness and experience their full potential.

Concluding Remarks

Over ten years ago already, in November 2003, the United States passed the Water Act, which made it impossible for water companies to undergo civil or criminal hearings as a result of adding fluoride to public water supplies. It becomes more and more difficult to affect change on a mass scale to practices such as water fluoridation when those who have political, military, and legal control enact these types of measures. Fortunately, it is still within people’s ability to take measures to avoid fluoride and speak out however, and to personally do what they can to preserve, exercise, and awaken their own consciousness.

This physicist says consciousness could be a new state of matter.


‘Perceptronium’.

 

Consciousness isn’t something scientists like to talk about much. You can’t see it, you can’t touch it, and despite the best efforts of certain researchersyou can’t quantify it. And in science, if you can’t measure something, you’re going to have a tough time explaining it.

But consciousness exists, and it’s one of the most fundamental aspects of what makes us human. And just like dark matter and dark energy have been used to fill some otherwise gaping holes in the standard model of physics, researchers have also proposed that it’s possible to consider consciousness as a new state of matter.

 To be clear, this is just a hypothesis, and one to be taken with a huge grain of salt, because we’re squarely in the realm of the hypothetical here, and there’s plenty of room for holes to be poked.

But it’s part of a quietly bubbling movement within theoretical physics and neuroscience to try and attach certain basic principles to consciousness in order to make it more observable.

The hypothesis was first put forward in 2014 by cosmologist and theoretical physicist Max Tegmark from MIT, who proposed that there’s a state of matter – just like a solid, liquid, or gas – in which atoms are arranged to process information and give rise to subjectivity, and ultimately, consciousness.

The name of this proposed state of matter? Perceptronium, of course.

As Tegmark explains in his paper, published in the journal Chaos, Solitons & Fractals:

“Generations of physicists and chemists have studied what happens when you group together vast numbers of atoms, finding that their collective behaviour depends on the pattern in which they are arranged: the key difference between a solid, a liquid, and a gas lies not in the types of atoms, but in their arrangement.

In this paper, I conjecture that consciousness can be understood as yet another state of matter. Just as there are many types of liquids, there are many types of consciousness.

However, this should not preclude us from identifying, quantifying, modelling, and ultimately understanding the characteristic properties that all liquid forms of matter (or all conscious forms of matter) share.”

In other words, Tegmark isn’t suggesting that there are physical clumps of perceptronium sitting somewhere in your brain and coursing through your veins to impart a sense of self-awareness.

Rather, he proposes that consciousness can be interpreted as a mathematical pattern – the result of a particular set of mathematical conditions.

 Just as there are certain conditions under which various states of matter – such as steam, water, and ice – can arise, so too can various forms of consciousness, he argues.

Figuring out what it takes to produce these various states of consciousness according to observable and measurable conditions could help us get a grip on what it actually is, and what that means for a human, a monkey, a flea, or a supercomputer.

The idea was inspired by the work of neuroscientist Giulio Tononi from the University of Wisconsin in Madison, who proposed in 2008 that if you wanted to prove that something had consciousness, you had to demonstrate two specific traits.

According to his integrated information theory (IIT), the first of these traits is that a conscious being must be capable of storing, processing, and recalling large amounts of information.

“And second,” explains the arXiv.org blog, “this information must be integrated in a unified whole, so that it is impossible to divide into independent parts.”

This means that consciousness has to be taken as a whole, and cannot be broken down into separate components. A conscious being or system has to not only be able to store and process information, but it must do so in a way that forms a complete, indivisible whole, Tononi argued.

If it occurred to you that a supercomputer could potentially have these traits, that’s sort of what Tononi was getting at.

As George Johnson writes for The New York Times, Tononi’s hypothesis predicted – with a whole lot of maths – that “devices as simple as a thermostat or a photoelectric diode might have glimmers of consciousness – a subjective self”.

In Tononi’s calculations, those “glimmers of consciousness” do not necessarily equal a conscious system, and he even came up with a unit, called phi or Φ, which he said could be used to measure how conscious a particular entity is.

Six years later, Tegmark proposed that there are two types of matter that could be considered according to the integrated information theory.

The first is ‘computronium’, which meets the requirements of the first trait of being able to store, process, and recall large amounts of information. And the second is ‘perceptronium’, which does all of the above, but in a way that forms the indivisible whole Tononi described.

In his paper, Tegmark explores what he identifies as the five basic principles that could be used to distinguish conscious matter from other physical systems such as solids, liquids, and gases – “the information, integration, independence, dynamics, and utility principles”.

He then spends 30 pages or so trying to explain how his new way of thinking about consciousness could explain the unique human perspective on the Universe.

As the arXiv.org blog explains, “When we look at a glass of iced water, we perceive the liquid and the solid ice cubes as independent things even though they are intimately linked as part of the same system. How does this happen? Out of all possible outcomes, why do we perceive this solution?”

It’s an incomplete thought, because Tegmark doesn’t have a solution. And as you might have guessed, it’s not something that his peers have been eager to take up and run with. But you can read his thoughts as they stand in the journal Chaos, Solitons & Fractals.

That’s the problem with something like consciousness – if you can’t measure your attempts to measure it, how can you be sure you’ve measured it at all?

More recently, scientists have attempted to explain how human consciousness could be transferred into an artificial body – seriously, there’s a start-up that wants to do this – and one group of Swiss physicists have suggested consciousness occurs in ‘time slices’that are hundreds of milliseconds apart.

As Matthew Davidson, who studies the neuroscience of consciousness at Monash University in Australia, explains over at The Conversation, we still don’t know much about what consciousness actually is, but it’s looking more and more likely that it’s something we need to consider outside the realm of humans.

“If consciousness is indeed an emergent feature of a highly integrated network, as IIT suggests, then probably all complex systems – certainly all creatures with brains – have some minimal form of consciousness,” he says.

“By extension, if consciousness is defined by the amount of integrated information in a system, then we may also need to move away from any form of human exceptionalism that says consciousness is exclusive to us.”

Quantum Theory Proves Consciousness Moves To Another Universe After Death


A book titled “Biocentrism: How Life and Consciousness Are the Keys to Understanding the Nature of the Universe” has stirred up the Internet, because it contained a notion that life does not end when the body dies, and it can last forever. The author of this publication, scientist Dr. Robert Lanza who was voted the 3rd most important scientist alive by the NY Times, has no doubts that this is possible.

1. BEYOND TIME AND SPACE

Lanza is an expert in regenerative medicine and scientific director of Advanced Cell Technology Company. Before he has been known for his extensive research which dealt with stem cells, he was also famous for several successful experiments on cloning endangered animal species.

But not so long ago, the scientist became involved with physics, quantum mechanics and astrophysics. This explosive mixture has given birth to the new theory of biocentrism, which the professor has been preaching ever since. Biocentrism teaches that life and consciousness are fundamental to the universe. It is consciousness that creates the material universe, not the other way around.

Lanza points to the structure of the universe itself, and that the laws, forces, and constants of the universe appear to be fine-tuned for life, implying intelligence existed prior to matter. He also claims that space and time are not objects or things, but rather tools of our animal understanding. Lanza says that we carry space and time around with us “like turtles with shells.” meaning that when the shell comes off (space and time), we still exist.

The theory implies that death of consciousness simply does not exist. It only exists as a thought because people identify themselves with their body. They believe that the body is going to perish, sooner or later, thinking their consciousness will disappear too. If the body generates consciousness, then consciousness dies when the body dies. But if the body receives consciousness in the same way that a cable box receives satellite signals, then of course consciousness does not end at the death of the physical vehicle. In fact, consciousness exists outside of constraints of time and space. It is able to be anywhere: in the human body and outside of it. In other words, it is non-local in the same sense that quantum objects are non-local.

Lanza also believes that multiple universes can exist simultaneously. In one universe, the body can be dead. And in another it continues to exist, absorbing consciousness which migrated into this universe. This means that a dead person while traveling through the same tunnel ends up not in hell or in heaven, but in a similar world he or she once inhabited, but this time alive. And so on, infinitely. It’s almost like a cosmic Russian doll afterlife effect.

2. MULTIPLE WORLDS

This hope-instilling, but extremely controversial theory by Lanza has many unwitting supporters, not just mere mortals who want to live forever, but also some well-known scientists. These are the physicists and astrophysicists who tend to agree with existence of parallel worlds and who suggest the possibility of multiple universes. Multiverse (multi-universe) is a so-called scientific concept, which they defend. They believe that no physical laws exist which would prohibit the existence of parallel worlds.

The first one was a science fiction writer H.G. Wells who proclaimed in 1895 in his story “The Door in the Wall”. And after 62 years, this idea was developed by Dr. Hugh Everett in his graduate thesis at the Princeton University. It basically posits that at any given moment the universe divides into countless similar instances. And the next moment, these “newborn” universes split in a similar fashion. In some of these worlds you may be present: reading this article in one universe, or watching TV in another.

The triggering factor for these multiplyingworlds is our actions, explained Everett. If we make some choices, instantly one universe splits into two with different versions of outcomes.

In the 1980s, Andrei Linde, scientist from the Lebedev’s Institute of physics, developed the theory of multiple universes. He is now a professor at Stanford University. Linde explained: Space consists of many inflating spheres, which give rise to similar spheres, and those, in turn, produce spheres in even greater numbers, and so on to infinity. In the universe, they are spaced apart. They are not aware of each other’s existence. But they represent parts of the same physical universe.

The fact that our universe is not alone is supported by data received from the Planck space telescope. Using the data, scientists have created the most accurate map of the microwave background, the so-called cosmic relic background radiation, which has remained since the inception of our universe. They also found that the universe has a lot of dark recesses represented by some holes and extensive gaps.

Theoretical physicist Laura Mersini-Houghton from the North Carolina University with her colleagues argue: the anomalies of the microwave background exist due to the fact that our universe is influenced by other universes existing nearby. And holes and gaps are a direct result of attacks on us by neighboring universes.

3. SOUL

So, there is abundance of places or other universes where our soul could migrate after death, according to the theory of neo-biocentrism. But does the soul exist? Is there any scientific theory of consciousness that could accommodate such a claim? According to Dr. Stuart Hameroff, a near-death experience happens when the quantum information that inhabits the nervous system leaves the body and dissipates into the universe. Contrary to materialistic accounts of consciousness, Dr. Hameroff offers an alternative explanation of consciousness that can perhaps appeal to both the rational scientific mind and personal intuitions.

See also: Russian Scientist Photographs Soul Leaving Body And Quantifies Chakras. You Must See This!

Consciousness resides, according to Stuart and British physicist Sir Roger Penrose, in the microtubules of the brain cells, which are the primary sites of quantum processing. Upon death, this information is released from your body, meaning that your consciousness goes with it. They have argued that our experience of consciousness is the result of quantum gravity effects in these microtubules, a theory which they dubbed orchestrated objective reduction (Orch-OR).

Consciousness, or at least proto-consciousness is theorized by them to be a fundamental property of the universe, present even at the first moment of the universe during the Big Bang. “In one such scheme proto-conscious experience is a basic property of physical reality accessible to a quantum process associated with brain activity.”

Our souls are in fact constructed from the very fabric of the universe – and may have existed since the beginning of time. Our brains are just receivers and amplifiers for the proto-consciousness that is intrinsic to the fabric of space-time. So is there really a part of your consciousness that is non-material and will live on after the death of your physical body?

Dr Hameroff told the Science Channel’s Through the Wormhole documentary: “Let’s say the heart stops beating, the blood stops flowing, the microtubules lose their quantum state. The quantum information within the microtubules is not destroyed, it can’t be destroyed, it just distributes and dissipates to the universe at large”. Robert Lanza would add here that not only does it exist in the universe, it exists perhaps in another universe. If the patient is resuscitated, revived, this quantum information can go back into the microtubules and the patient says “I had a near death experience”

He adds: “If they’re not revived, and the patient dies, it’s possible that this quantum information can exist outside the body, perhaps indefinitely, as a soul.”

This account of quantum consciousness explains things like near-death experiences, astral projection, out of body experiences, and even reincarnation without needing to appeal to religious ideology. The energy of your consciousness potentially gets recycled back into a different body at some point, and in the mean time it exists outside of the physical body on some other level of reality, and possibly in another universe.

ROBERT LANZA ON BIOCENTRISM:

World’s Smartest Physicist Thinks Science Can’t Crack Consciousness


String theorist Edward Witten says consciousness “will remain a mystery”.

Physicist Edward Witten: “I think consciousness will remain a mystery… I have a much easier time imagining how we understand the Big Bang than I have imagining how we can understand consciousness.” 

I’ve been writing a lot lately about consciousness, the ultimate enigma. I used to think why there is something rather than nothing is the ultimate enigma. But without mind, there might as well be nothing.

Some mind-ponderers, notably philosopher Colin McGinn, argue that consciousness is unsolvable. Philosopher Owen Flanagan calls these pessimists “mysterians,” after the 60’s-era rock group “Question Mark and the Mysterians.”

Recently, physicist Edward Witten came out as a mysterian. Witten is regarded with awe by his fellow physicists, some of whom have compared him to Einstein and Newton. He is largely responsible for the popularity of string theory over the past several decades. String theory holds that all of nature’s forces stem from infinitesimal particles wriggling in a hyperspace consisting of many extra dimensions.

Witten is optimistic about science’s power to solve mysteries, such as why there is something rather than nothing. In a 2014 Q&A with me he said: “The modern scientific endeavor has been going on for hundreds of years by now, and we’ve gotten way farther than our predecessors probably imagined.” He also reaffirmed his belief that string theory will turn out to be “right.”

But in a fascinating video interview with journalist Wim Kayzer, Witten is pessimistic about the prospects for a scientific explanation of consciousness. The chemist Ash Jogalekar, who blogs as “The Curious Wavefunction,” wrote about Witten’s speech and transcribed the relevant section. (Thanks, Ash.) Here is an excerpt:

I think consciousness will remain a mystery. Yes, that’s what I tend to believe. I tend to think that the workings of the conscious brain will be elucidated to a large extent. Biologists and perhaps physicists will understand much better how the brain works. But why something that we call consciousness goes with those workings, I think that will remain mysterious. I have a much easier time imagining how we understand the Big Bang than I have imagining how we can understand consciousness… 

Just because Witten is a genius does not mean he is infallible. He is wrong, I believe, that string theory will eventually be validated, and he could be wrong that consciousness will never be explained. I nonetheless find it newsworthy—and refreshing–that a scientist of his caliber is talking so candidly about the limits of science. For reasons that are perhaps too obvious, I like Ash Jogalekar’s take on Witten’s comments. An excerpt:

It’s interesting to contrast Witten’s thoughts with John Horgan’s End of Science thesis… The end of science really is the end of the search for final causation. In that sense not just consciousness but many aspects of the world may always remain a mystery. Whether that is emotionally pleasing or disconcerting is an individual choice that each one of us has to make.

Quantum Theory Proves That Consciousness Moves To Another Universe After Death | TruthTheory


A book titled Biocentrism: How Life and Consciousness Are the Keys to Understanding the Nature of the Universe, published in the USA, has stirred up the Internet, because it contained a notion that life does not end when the body dies, but your consciousness moves to another universe after death . The author of this publication, scientist Robert Lanza has no doubts that this is possible.

Beyond time and space

Lanza is an expert in regenerative medicine and scientific director of Advanced Cell Technology Company. Before he has been known for his extensive research which dealt with stem cells, he was also famous for several successful experiments on cloning endangered animal species.

But not so long ago, the scientist became involved with physics, quantum mechanics and astrophysics. This explosive mixture has given birth to the new theory of biocentrism, which the professor has been preaching ever since.

The theory implies that death simply does not exist. It is an illusion which arises in the minds of people. It exists because people identify themselves with their body. They believe that the body is going to perish, sooner or later, thinking their consciousness will disappear too. In fact, consciousness exists outside of constraints of time and space. It is able to be anywhere: in the human body and outside of it. That fits well with the basic postulates of quantum mechanics science, according to which a certain particle can be present anywhere and an event can happen according to several, sometimes countless, ways.

Lanza believes that multiple universes can exist simultaneously. These universes contain multiple ways for possible scenarios to occur. In one universe, the body can be dead. And in another it continues to exist, absorbing consciousness which migrated into this universe.

This means that a dead person while traveling through the same tunnel ends up not in hell or in heaven, but in a similar world he or she once inhabited, but this time alive. And so on, infinitely.soul

Multiple worlds

This hope-instilling, but extremely controversial theory by Lanza has many unwitting supporters, not just mere mortals who want to live forever, but also some well-known scientists. These are the physicists and astrophysicists who tend to agree with existence of parallel worlds and who suggest the possibility of multiple universes. Multiverse (multi-universe) is a so-called scientific concept, which they defend. They believe that no physical laws exist which would prohibit the existence of parallel worlds.
Painting-Multiverse-Rising_photo_mediumThe first one was a science fiction writer H.G. Wells who proclaimed in 1895 in his story “The Door in the Wall”.  And after 62 years, this idea was developed by Hugh Everett in his graduate thesis at the Princeton University. It basically posits that at any given moment the universe divides into countless similar instances. And the next moment, these “newborn” universes split in a similar fashion. In some of these worlds you may be present: reading this article in one universe, or watching TV in another.

The triggering factor for these multiplying worlds is our actions, explained Everett. If we make some choices, instantly one universe splits into two with different versions of outcomes.

In the 1980s, Andrei Linde, scientist from the Lebedev’s Institute of physics, developed the theory of multiple universes. He is now a professor at Stanford University.

Linde explained: Space consists of many inflating spheres, which give rise to similar spheres, and those, in turn, produce spheres in even greater numbers, and so on to infinity. In the universe, they are spaced apart. They are not aware of each other’s existence. But they represent parts of the same physical universe.

The fact that our universe is not alone is supported by data received from the Planck space telescope. Using the data, scientists have created the most accurate map of the microwave background, the so-called cosmic relic background radiation, which has remained since the inception of our universe. They also found that the universe has a lot of dark recesses represented by some holes and extensive gaps.

Theoretical physicist Laura Mersini-Houghton from the North Carolina University with her colleagues argue: the anomalies of the microwave background exist due to the fact that our universe is influenced by other universes existing nearby. And holes and gaps are a direct result of attacks on us by neighboring universes.

Soul quanta

So, there is abundance of places or other universes where our soul could migrate after death, according to the theory of neo-biocentrism. But does the soul exist?
maxresdefaultProfessor Stuart Hamerofffrom the University of Arizona has no doubts about the existence of eternal soul. As recently as last year, he announced that he has foundevidence that consciousness does not perish after death.

According to Hameroff, the human brain is the perfect quantum computer and the soul or consciousness is simply information stored at the quantum level. It can be transferred, following the death of the body; quantum information represented by consciousness merges with our universe and exist there indefinitely. The biocentrism expert Lanza proves that the soul migrates to another universe. That is the main difference from his other colleagues.

Sir Roger Penrose, a famous British physicist and expert in mathematics from Oxford, supports this theory, and he has also found traces of contact with other universes. Together, the scientists are developing quantum theory to explain the phenomenon of consciousness. They believe that they found carriers of consciousness, the elements that accumulate information during life, and after death of the body they “drain” consciousness somewhere else. These elements are located inside protein-based microtubules (neuronal microtubules), which previously have been attributed a simple role of reinforcement and transport channeling inside a living cell. Based on their structure, microtubules are best suited to function as carriers of quantum properties inside the brain. That is mainly because they are able to retain quantum states for a long time, meaning they can function as elements of a quantum computer.

If the patient is resuscitated, revived, this quantum information can go back into the microtubules and the patient says “I had a near death experience”‘

He adds: “If they’re not revived, and the patient dies, it’s possible that this quantum information can exist outside the body, perhaps indefinitely, as a soul.”

This account of quantum consciousness explains things like near-death experiences, astral projection, out of body experiences, and even reincarnation without needing to appeal to religious ideology.  The energy of your consciousness potentially gets recycled back into a different body at some point, and in the mean time it exists outside of the physical body on some other level of reality, and possibly in another universe.

Watch the video. URL:https://youtu.be/zI_F4nOKDSM

Physicists Say Consciousness May Be A State Of Matter:


“Looking for consciousness in the brain is like looking in the radio for the announcer.” – Nassim Haramein, director of research for the Resonance Project

consciousness

It’s been more than one hundred years since Max Planck, the theoretical physicist who originated quantum theory, which won him the Nobel Prize in Physics, said that he regards “consciousness as fundamental,”  that he regards “matter as a derivative from consciousness,” and that “everything we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.”

He is basically saying that the immaterial ‘substance’ of consciousness is directly intertwined with what we perceive to be our physical material world in some sort of way, shape or form, that consciousness is required for matter to be, that it becomes after consciousness….and he’s not the only physicist to believe that.

“It was not possible to formulate the laws of quantum mechanics in a fully consistent way without reference to consciousness.” – Eugene Wigner, theoretical physicist  and mathematician. He received a share of the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1963

Scientists have been urging the mainstream scientific community, which today is littered with scientific fraud and industry influence as well as invention secrecy, to open up to a broader view regarding the true nature of our reality.

“The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade that in all of the previous centuries of its existence.” – Nikola Tesla

Not long ago, a group of internationally recognized scientists came together to stress this fact and how it’s overlooked by the mainstream scientific community. It’s ‘post-material” science, an area of study dealing with the ‘non-physical realm, and it’s challenging the modern scientific worldview of materialism that’s dominated mainstream science. The idea that matter is not the reality is finally starting to gain some merrit. The summary of this report presented at the International Summit On Post-Materialist Science can be found HERE.

“The modern scientific worldview is predominantly predicated on assumptions that are closely associated with classical physics. Materialism—the idea that matter is the only reality—is one of these assumptions. A related assumption is reductionism, the notion that complex things can be understood by reducing them to the interactions of their parts, or to simpler or more fundamental things such as tiny material particles.” – Manifesto for a Post-Materialist Science

MIT’s Max Tegmark,a theoretical physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, is one of the latest to attempt explaining why he believes consciousness is a state of matter. He believes that consciousness arises out of a certain set of mathematical conditions, and that there are varying degrees of consciousness – just as certain conditions are required to create varying states of vapor, water, and ice. As PBS emphasized, “understanding how consciousness functions as a separate state of matter could help us come to a more thorough understanding of why we perceive the world the way we do.” (source)

Tegmark describes this as “perceptronium,” which he defines as the most general substance that feels subjectively self-aware and this substance should not only be able to store information, but do it in a way that form a unified, indivisible, whole.

“The problem is why we perceive the universe as the semi-classical, three dimensional world that is so familiar. When we look at a glass of iced water, we perceive the liquid and the solid ice cubes as independent things even though they are intimately linked as part of the same system. How does this happen? Out of all possible outcomes, we do we perceive this solution?” – Tegmark (source)

This new way of thinking about consciousness has been spreading throughout the physics community at an exponential rate within the past few years. Considering consciousness as an actual state of matter would be huge, considering the fact that modern day definitions of matter require a substance to have mass, which consciousness does not have. What it does have, however, is some sort of effect on our physical material world, and the extent of this effect and how far it goes is the next step for science.

The quantum double slit experiment is a very popular experiment used to examine how consciousness and our physical material world are intertwined. It is a great example that documents how factors associated with consciousness and our physical material world are connected in some way.

One potential revelation of this experience is that “the observer creates the reality.” A paper published in the peer-reviewed journal Physics Essays by Dean Radin, PhD, explains how this experiment has been used multiple times to explore the role of consciousness in shaping the nature of physical reality.

The study found that factors associated with consciousness “significantly” correlated in predicted ways with perturbations in the double slit interference pattern. (source)

“Observation not only disturbs what has to be measured, they produce it. We compel the electron to assume a definite position. We ourselves produce the results of the measurement.” (source)

For a physicist to brush off the fact that understanding consciousness is necessary for the advancement and understanding of the nature of our reality is not as common as it used to be but, despite the empirical success of quantum theory, even the suggesting that it could be true as a description of our reality is greeted with harsh cynicism, incomprehension and even anger.

“A fundamental conclusion of the new physics also acknowledges that the observer creates the reality. As observers, we are personally involved with the creation of our own reality. Physicists are being forced to admit that the universe is a “mental” construction. Pioneering physicist Sir James Jeans wrote: “The stream of knowledge is heading toward a non-mechanical reality; the universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine. Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter, we ought rather hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter. Get over it, and accept the inarguable conclusion. The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.” 

200 Best Movies For The Evolution Of Consciousness


200-best-movies-for-the-evolution-of-consciousness

Without a doubt, transformative media has played a huge role in the awakening process.  If you’re going to watch a movie, it might as well be one that contributes to your awakening and expansion.

Here is a list of all the movies we believe can assist one with the evolution of consciousness. If you know of any similar ones you think we might like, please, post links to them in the comments below.

We did the hard work for you, and organized this list in terms of transformative potential.  Here are the 200 best movies for the evolution of consciousness:

  1. The Matrix (1999)
  2. The Matrix Reloaded (2003)
  3. The Matrix Revolutions (2003)
  4. The Animatrix (2003)
  5. Fight Club (1999)
  6. Contact (1997)
  7. Avatar (2009)
  8. K-PAX (2001)
  9. Into the Wild (2007)
  10. V for Vendetta (2005)
  11. The Terminator (1984)
  12. Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991)
  13. What Dreams May Come (1998)
  14. Predestination (2014)
  15. Vanilla Sky (2001)
  16. The Man from Earth (2007)
  17. Waking Life (2001)
  18. Interstellar (2014)
  19. Enter the Void (2009)
  20. The Thirteenth Floor (1999)
  21. Mr. Nobody (2009)
  22. Blueberry (2004)
  23. They Live (1988)
  24. Cloud Atlas (2012)
  25. I Origins (2014)
  26. Oblivion (2013)
  27. Lucy (2014)
  28. The Butterfly Effect (2004)
  29. Donnie Darko (2001)
  30. Artificial Intelligence (2001)
  31. Edge of Tomorrow (2014)
  32. Inception (2010)
  33. The Adjustment Bureau (2011)
  34. The Fountain (2006)
  35. Samsara (2011)
  36. Baraka (1992)
  37. Koyaanisqatsi (1982)
  38. Dark City (1998)
  39. The Manchurian Candidate (2004)
  40. Altered States (1980)
  41. The Truman Show (1998)
  42. Twelve Monkeys (1995)
  43. The Fifth Element (1997)
  44. Transcendence (2014)
  45. Stargate (1994)
  46. Lord of War (2005)
  47. I, Robot (2004)
  48. Jupiter Ascending (2015)
  49. Equilibrium (2002)
  50. Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace (1999)
  51. Star Wars: Episode II – Attack of the Clones (2002)
  52. Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith (2005)
  53. Star Wars: Episode IV – A New Hope (1977)
  54. Star Wars: Episode V – The Empire Strikes Back (1980)
  55. Star Wars: Episode VI – Return of the Jedi (1983)
  56. X-Men (2000)
  57. X-Men 2 (2003)
  58. X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)
  59. X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009)
  60. X-Men: First Class (2011)
  61. X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014)
  62. Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979)
  63. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982)
  64. Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984) 
  65. Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986)
  66. Star Trek V: The Final Frontier (1989)
  67. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991)
  68. Star Trek: Generations (1994)
  69. Star Trek: First Contact (1996)
  70. Star Trek: Insurrection (1998)
  71. Star Trek: Nemesis (2002)
  72. Star Trek (2009)
  73. Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)
  74. 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
  75. Requiem for a Dream (2000)
  76. The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (2005)
  77. A Beautiful Mind (2001)
  78. Alice in Wonderland (2010)
  79. The Time Machine (2002)
  80. Groundhog Day (1993)
  81. Pan’s Labyrinth (2006)
  82. Planet of the Apes (2001)
  83. Planet of the Apes (1968)
  84. Memento (2000)
  85. The Bourne Identity (2002)
  86. Total Recall (1990)
  87. A Scanner Darkly (2006)
  88. Being John Malkovich (1999)
  89. Pandorum (2009)
  90. Pleasantville (1998)
  91. Lost in Translation (2003)
  92. Idiocracy (2006)
  93. Peaceful Warrior (2006)
  94. Conversations with God (2006)
  95. Braveheart (1995)
  96. Seven Pounds (2008)
  97. Pay It Forward (2000)
  98. The Book of Eli (2010)
  99. Gravity (2013)
  100. The Celestine Prophecy (2006)
  101. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998)
  102. Crash (2004)
  103. Hotel Rwanda (2004)
  104. Slumdog Millionaire (2008)
  105. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
  106. Waterworld (1995)
  107. Gandhi (1982)
  108. Limitless (2011)
  109. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)
  110. Eyes Wide Shut (1999)
  111. Good Will Hunting (1997)
  112. Forrest Gump (1994)
  113. Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior (1981)
  114. Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985)
  115. Mad Max: Fury Road (2015)
  116. The Road (2009)
  117. Solaris (2002)
  118. Gattaca (1997)
  119. Blade Runner (1982)
  120. The Island (2005)
  121. 1984 (1984)
  122. Powder (1995)
  123. Moon (2009)
  124. Blood Diamond (2006)
  125. Independence Day (1996)
  126. Phenomenon (1996)
  127. Soylent Green (1973)
  128. Ex Machina (2015)
  129. American Beauty (1999)
  130. Ender’s Game (2013)
  131. Source Code (2011)
  132. Children of Men (2006)
  133. In Time (2011)
  134. Devil’s Advocate (1997)
  135. The Avengers (2012)
  136. Event Horizon (1997)
  137. Bicentennial Man (1999)
  138. Dr. Strangelove (1964)
  139. Fahrenheit 451 (1966)
  140. A Clockwork Orange (1971)
  141. Hunger Games (2012)
  142. Cast Away (2000)
  143. The Neverending Story (1984)
  144. The Shawshank Redemption (1994)
  145. Divergent (2014)
  146. After Earth (2013)
  147. Another Earth (2011)
  148. Surrogates (2009)
  149. WALL·E (2008)
  150. Enemy of the State (1998)
  151. Serenity (2005)
  152. Chronicle (2012)
  153. A Bug’s Life (1998)
  154. The Prestige (2006)
  155. Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory (1971)
  156. Karate Kid (1984)
  157. Eagle Eye (2008)
  158. District 9 (2009)
  159. Conspiracy Theory (1997)
  160. City of God (2002)
  161. Network (1976)
  162. Maze Runner (2014)
  163. Europa Report (2013)
  164. Prometheus (2012)
  165. The 6th Day (2000)
  166. The Music Never Stopped (2011)
  167. Chappie (2015)
  168. Wag the Dog (1997)
  169. Erin Brockovich (2000)
  170. The Abyss (1989)
  171. Good Kill (2014)
  172. Life of Pi (2012)
  173. Snowpiercer (2013)
  174. Tomorrowland (2015)
  175. Mission to Mars (2000)
  176. Yes Man (2008)
  177. The Sixth Sense (1999)
  178. It’s a Wonderful Life (1946)
  179. Eat Pray Love (2010)
  180. The Tree of Life (2011)
  181. Her (2013)
  182. Minority Report (2002)
  183. Dark Skies (2013)
  184. Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)
  185. The Wizard of Oz (1939)
  186. The Day the Earth Stood Still (2008)
  187. War of the Worlds (2005)
  188. The Green Mile (1999)
  189. The Signal (2014)
  190. Hook (1991)
  191. Knowing (2009)
  192. Dead Poets Society (1989)
  193. Deja Vu (2006)
  194. The Great Dictator (1940)
  195. The Faculty (1998)
  196. Starship Troopers (1997)
  197. Apocalypto (2006)
  198. Flatliners (1990)
  199. Sunshine (2007)
  200. Imposter (2001)

Physicists Say Consciousness May Be A State Of Matter: The Non-Physical Is Indeed Real


consciousness

“Looking for consciousness in the brain is like looking in the radio for the announcer.” – Nassim Haramein, director of research for the Resonance Project

It’s been more than one hundred years since Max Planck, the theoretical physicist who originated quantum theory, which won him the Nobel Prize in Physics, said that he regards “consciousness as fundamental,”  that he regards “matter as a derivative from consciousness,” and that “everything we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.”

He is basically saying that the immaterial ‘substance’ of consciousness is directly intertwined with what we perceive to be our physical material world in some sort of way, shape or form, that consciousness is required for matter to be, that it becomes after consciousness….and he’s not the only physicist to believe that.

“It was not possible to formulate the laws of quantum mechanics in a fully consistent way without reference to consciousness.” – Eugene Wigner, theoretical physicist  and mathematician. He received a share of the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1963

Scientists have been urging the mainstream scientific community, which today is littered with scientific fraud and industry influence as well as invention secrecy, to open up to a broader view regarding the true nature of our reality.

“The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade that in all of the previous centuries of its existence.” – Nikola Tesla

Not long ago, a group of internationally recognized scientists came together to stress this fact and how it’s overlooked by the mainstream scientific community. It’s ‘post-material” science, an area of study dealing with the ‘non-physical realm, and it’s challenging the modern scientific worldview of materialism that’s dominated mainstream science. The idea that matter is not the reality is finally starting to gain some merrit. The summary of this report presented at the International Summit On Post-Materialist Science can be found HERE.

“The modern scientific worldview is predominantly predicated on assumptions that are closely associated with classical physics. Materialism—the idea that matter is the only reality—is one of these assumptions. A related assumption is reductionism, the notion that complex things can be understood by reducing them to the interactions of their parts, or to simpler or more fundamental things such as tiny material particles.” – Manifesto for a Post-Materialist Science

MIT’s Max Tegmark,a theoretical physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, is one of the latest to attempt explaining why he believes consciousness is a state of matter. He believes that consciousness arises out of a certain set of mathematical conditions, and that there are varying degrees of consciousness – just as certain conditions are required to create varying states of vapor, water, and ice. As PBS emphasized, “understanding how consciousness functions as a separate state of matter could help us come to a more thorough understanding of why we perceive the world the way we do.” (source)

Tegmark describes this as “perceptronium,” which he defines as the most general substance that feels subjectively self-aware and this substance should not only be able to store information, but do it in a way that form a unified, indivisible, whole.

“The problem is why we perceive the universe as the semi-classical, three dimensional world that is so familiar. When we look at a glass of iced water, we perceive the liquid and the solid ice cubes as independent things even though they are intimately linked as part of the same system. How does this happen? Out of all possible outcomes, we do we perceive this solution?” – Tegmark (source)

This new way of thinking about consciousness has been spreading throughout the physics community at an exponential rate within the past few years. Considering consciousness as an actual state of matter would be huge, considering the fact that modern day definitions of matter require a substance to have mass, which consciousness does not have. What it does have, however, is some sort of effect on our physical material world, and the extent of this effect and how far it goes is the next step for science.

The quantum double slit experiment is a very popular experiment used to examine how consciousness and our physical material world are intertwined. It is a great example that documents how factors associated with consciousness and our physical material world are connected in some way.

One potential revelation of this experience is that “the observer creates the reality.” A paper published in the peer-reviewed journal Physics Essays by Dean Radin, PhD, explains how this experiment has been used multiple times to explore the role of consciousness in shaping the nature of physical reality.

The study found that factors associated with consciousness “significantly” correlated in predicted ways with perturbations in the double slit interference pattern. (source)

“Observation not only disturbs what has to be measured, they produce it. We compel the electron to assume a definite position. We ourselves produce the results of the measurement.” (source)

For a physicist to brush off the fact that understanding consciousness is necessary for the advancement and understanding of the nature of our reality is not as common as it used to be but, despite the empirical success of quantum theory, even the suggesting that it could be true as a description of our reality is greeted with harsh cynicism, incomprehension and even anger.

“A fundamental conclusion of the new physics also acknowledges that the observer creates the reality. As observers, we are personally involved with the creation of our own reality. Physicists are being forced to admit that the universe is a “mental” construction. Pioneering physicist Sir James Jeans wrote: “The stream of knowledge is heading toward a non-mechanical reality; the universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine. Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter, we ought rather hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter. Get over it, and accept the inarguable conclusion. The universe is immaterial-mental and spiritual.”  – R.C. Henry, Professor of Physics and Astronomy at Johns Hopkins University ,  “The Mental Universe” ; Nature 436:29,2005) (source)

Thanks for reading.

%d bloggers like this: