In his book, Entangled Minds, psychologist Dr. Dean Radin described the use of a random event generator in what he described as field consciousness experiments.
He used a Hewlett Packard Palm Computer with a miniaturized Random Event Generator (REG) plugged in. When turned on, an REG will vary randomly back and forth, turning on binary signals – either an A or B – or the equivalent of a coin toss, heads or tails and almost 100% of the time it will come up 50% heads and 50% tails, i.e. a 50% chance effect.
Over 120 REGs were distributed to volunteers all over the world who carried the REGs with them at all times. The REGs were checked daily and were programmed to telemetrically send the data to Dr. Radin’s laboratory in California.
Now we come to the interesting part. Whenever an event would occur that was of interest to primarly Americans, but also nine other countries of the world, the REGs would lose their randomness and the number of “hits” would cause the REGs to register larger “spikes” i.e. something of global interest was affecting the consciousness of millions of people throughout the world.
What caused the loss of randomness and extreme spiking? The OJ trial, Princess Diana’s tragic death, the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the death of JFK Jr., Superbowl games (watched by over one billion persons) and the plane crash of the Concorde. In addition, loss of randomness and extreme spiking also occurs at sacred sites such as Wounded knee, South Dakota (where an entire Sioux tribe was massacred), the great pyramid of Giza, Lourdes and other sacred sites.
As we segue from the “old” to the “new” reality, a restlessness is brewing in science. Some more open-minded scientists are looking at REG research as perhaps as mystical inspirations bubbling up from the subconscious while more hard core scientists refer to the research described above as “vulgar illusions”.
But the point of all of the above is to begin looking at the mind/brain conundrum in a different way. Many neuroscientists feel the mind is “created” by brain cells somehow magically interacting and “creating” mind. When you try to pin their reasoning down for proof of this transition from “matter” (brain cells) to mind – there is none – up to now, it has to be accepted as “faith” (hardly scientific).
Another interesting study of the mind’s ability to influence another mind – at a distance, occurred in a laboratory where two subjects that were close friends were placed in separate rooms 75 yards apart in a long hallway; both subjects were hooked up to EEGs with 12 electrodes attached to their scalps. A stimulus of a rapidly flashing light was exposed to only one of the subjects. Almost immediately, the brain waves of the second subject showed considerable electrical brain wave activity in their visual cortex – without any stimulation and no knowledge of the purpose of the experiment.
The research was published and it generated a flurry of ten replications of the study by ten different researchers around the world. Of the ten studies, eight were reported as positive. There is no biophysical mechanism, i.e. no theory at present that could account for the observed correlations between EEGs of two subjects separated by a distance of 75 yards.
I am certain that there must be many physicists and scientists who are very uncomfortable and experiencing some intellectual indigestion with the mystical and metaphysical implications of this research.
In 1963, Russian physiologist Leonid Vasiliev published a book Experiments In Mental Suggestion describing his research in “remote hypnosis”. Vasiliev demonstrated that good hypnotic subjects could be induced to fall into very deep hypnotic states and given hypnotic suggestions (which were enacted upon) from a distance, and in some cases, thousands of miles away. Again, this important book reinforced the non-locality of mind, i.e. mind is not “trapped inside our skulls and can impact both living and non-living systems with intent – from a distance”.
During the latter part of the 19th century, psychologist William James theorized that we use only 10% of our brain and our potential throughout our lives. Dr. James probably based his theory on the brain’s cellular makeup, which contains 10 billion neurons, or brain cells and 100 billion glial or supportive cells (I won’t go into the complexity and many functions of glial cells at this time). I think we use 100% of our brain but are only aware of the 10% because of our “cultural trance” (which limits what is truly possible) and our own individual “belief trances” which also create selective limitations in different areas of our lives.
I am reminded of a story about the Buddha who, when approached by a devotee was asked… “Are you a God?”. The Buddha responded, “No, I am not a God”. “Are you an angel?”, “no – I am not an angel” the Buddha replied. “What are you?” asked the devotee. Buddha responded – “I am awake”.
I believe that in order to attain the consciousness of the Buddha, we must de-hypnotize ourselves from our limiting belief and cultural trances so that we can expand our apertures of consciousness and become awake like the Buddha and other highly evolved souls. This means developing the two most powerful states of awareness, curiosity and an open mind so that we can straddle several octaves of consciousness simultaneously instead of being trapped in the one and only level of consciousness – the ten percent level within which most of us live our lives.
One of the best ways of expanding the bandwidth of our brain is novelty, i.e. exposing yourself to different kinds of books, ideas, discovery programs etc. that you ordinarily would not read or watch. I recently subscribed to Luminosity, which I have found most stimulating and forcing me to “stretch my mind” as the programs get progressively more challenging each week.
Lee Pulos, Ph.D., ABPP