Erwin Schrödinger tackled the Copenhagen interpretation by using a Cat, which became known as Schrödinger’s Cat. His thought experiment presented a scenario where the cat in question was both alive and dead at the same time. Schrödinger explained that in his thought experiment he placed the cat in a box with a flask of poison and a radioactive source. If an internal monitor detects radioactivity then the flask is shattered, releasing the poison that kills the cat. Clearly Schrödinger was a dog man, not a cat man! The problem is that after a while the cat is seen to be simultaneously alive and dead. Yet if someone looks in the box, the cat is seen as either alive or dead, not both.
Schrödinger’s Cat Becomes a Ghost
So, where am I going with all this I hear you shout! Well the basis of Schrödinger’s thought experiment is the question of when reality collapses into one possibility or another. This result usually becomes understood when observed. However what if in an environment with more variables, some of which are not entirely understood by us, reality doesn’t completely collapse into one possibility, but is shaped in part by the observer too?
Schrödinger’s Ghost – A Thought Experiment
Imagine a thought experiment if you will. Imagine a room situated in an old building that is several hundred years old. The room only has one access door, which you are stood outside. As you’re stood outside the room, which you’ve never been in before, you can imagine roughly what to expect when you open the door. This expectation is built from your experience, your belief system, your faith, your education and from information you may have been passed regarding the room. This expectation has set the probable boundaries of what the room maybe. At the very least you’ve an understanding of the shape and size of the room. As for the contents well that expectation is set by any information you may have on the room. However, what if the room is far from set. In fact what if the rooms location or at least it’s entrance is all we know. What if time in that room isn’t set either, which means any time frame within the room is possible, but only realised once we observe it.
With these possibilities in place perhaps time and events only settle once we observe the room ourselves. Oddly if this is the case then maybe a room like this could echo events or individuals previously in the room. Hence they may sometimes overlap as the room settles to the observers understanding of that reality. Which in turn provides us with our ghosts.
The Problem with Schrödinger’s Ghost
The fundamental problem with this is that we observe time as linear and trust our interpretation of the world around us. I suppose therefore that attempting to visualise the unseen world as currently at a state of flux at least as far as time is considered is a little bit of a leap of faith. Still let’s throw that linear understanding of time out of the window for this and buy into the concept that all time events exist within the room until observed when they collapse into a known singular reality.
Now if we bring three people into the room; 1) The Believer, 2)The Non-Believer and 3)The Undecided. Now although the room will present itself as a particular reality that all three may agree upon, there may also be variations to that reality based on the perception of each person. The Believer for example may hear, see or receive types of communication from beyond the time based reality they exist in. This could be perceived as spiritual communication both localised in space and time, but may not necessarily be the case. The Non-Believer may see only a simple room located in their space and time, with no evidence that the contents of this room may have been anything apart from what is seen. However the Undecided person may have confused understanding of the room, perhaps constantly questioning the events and experience he has within it. Sound familiar?
The Interesting Thing About Space and Time
The concept I’m suggesting here is that where we often attribute the survival of someone’s consciousness to a spirit and believe it exists in our own space time, we could in fact be mistaken. As much as we may believe and be convinced by communications from spirits which appear to prove knowledge from beyond the grave; can we really say that the source is that which we believe it to be. This paradox has continued to prevent proof of survival for many years and may continue to do so.
Could our experience of ghosts and spirits be temporal shadows and echoes? Until we can truly observe them and understand them they may constantly remain just beyond our understanding, Schrödinger’s Ghost.
For many of us that attempt to make some sense of the paranormal; the aim is to discover something that those science types will accept. Over the years this has been dominated by an attempt to find repeatable or replicable evidence for various psychical aspects and phenomena. In all fairness this approach to science has been around for well over 100 years and forms the basis for much of our understanding of science. So much so, that the methodology is built into our education system. This approach is then bolstered by peer reviewed papers in notable journals. The more important the journal the more important the scientists hypothesis is seen to be. The more journal publicity the paper gets the more chance that the research gets funding. Thus a complex paradox begins in which scientists only publish a small percentage of their data which supports their theory. This has been brought to light by attempts recently to replicate or validate some ‘landmark’ cases during a study by German research company Bayer in 2011. Their study discovered that more than 75% of the cases couldn’t be validated.
Science’s Tight Grip
So, the question is why does mainstream science adopt such tight regulations in regards to psychical research, demanding replicable results or even dismiss what we study! Granted I don’t expect them to simply accept everything that we discover, but sometimes it would be nice to see them adopt a more open minded approach!
However we must remember that although they can be considered a little antiquated, the approach that mainstream science takes has helped to lay the foundations of our scientific understanding. Much like the respect we should have for a knowledgeable forefather, we should remain respectful towards science as it stands. Thus we should continue to attempt to research and experiment looking for replicable results, but we should remain mindful of that which doesn’t fit the model too. After all it maybe that the answers we seek occur in an odd pattern which is far from obvious and only occurs at what seems very random occasions. These kinds of results never return data which fits the standard scientific model and is why mainstream science tends to reject them.
The Paranormal Hides Behind the Scenes
However let’s not get bogged down by all the science stuff. After all the distinctive separation that has existed between the spiritual and the scientific is in my opinion beginning to blur! Paranormal investigators are working harder to gather data to challenge science, psychical researchers and experimenters are working harder and beginning to be recognised as a part of mainstream science. Such centres of research as Rhine and the Koestler Parapsychology Unit are leading the way in trying to understand the aspects of the paranormal just like many of us are, but with excellent scientific theory, research and experimentation. The paranormal has inadvertently snuck into science, behind the scenes, learnt the hard way and is now beginning to raise its head up above the rest claiming its place. Things are changing, but still have a good distance to go! What is equally interesting is that technology is beginning to buy into many of the concepts of psychical research too. I’m not just talking about the various gadgets out there for ghost hunters, but the fact that researchers have made use of technology as a part of their experiments. For example; one paper I read explained the use of a computer to help communicate telepathic thoughts at a distance between two people. Which incidentally was based on simple communication and was actually successful?
Back to that blur between the spiritual and the scientific! Think about it and even check your phone if you like. Society has begun to embrace certain practises associated historically with spirituality. The most significant of these being meditation. Many have begun to understand the benefits of meditation and how it can help to improve day to day life. In fact our friend science has several papers on meditation and its positive impact, and if science agrees it must be right!
So, Is Science Losing Its Direction?
This brings me back to the title question; is science losing its direction? The answer is a simple ‘no’ really! Science is evolving, albeit gradually, it’s getting there and like spirituality we must not lose faith in it. After all it’s brought us great understanding of the world, the universe and beyond. Not to mention our latest and growing understanding of the quantum world which has perhaps expanded our knowledge to new extremities. It’s fair to say that quantum physics may even have helped to show scientists greater possibilities. Such things as entanglement and the possibilities of multiple dimensions often sounds like something a spiritualist may talk about (and have) rather than top scientists at CERN, for example. However they do often and are even experimenting in these areas too, the division is well and truly blurred!
The Evolution of Science and Spirituality
Science and spirituality are evolving right before our eyes and not separately either! Many scientists are adopting variations of spirituality into their lives, whilst spiritualists are becoming increasingly open to scientific method in order to communicate better with their siblings of science knowledge which they’ve had faith in for years. That which was once one, shall be so again one day.
We are complex little organisms us humans, caught in an existence bound by an individual view of the world around us. Many of us travel through life with a simple view that although there are obviously others all around us, each of us is an individual entity managing our own existence. Whereas to an extent of our day to day life this is reasonably true, there are also fundemental aspects which seemingly tie us to others constantly.
When I first began reading more about telepathy, looking into more detailed research and realised that there was an abundance of data out there to support the phenomena; it wasn’t the unusual that surprised me! In fact it was the more simplistic and obvious that began to inspire me. It may seem a little odd, but it confused me when I first read about these aspects of life which could be attributed to telepathy. How did I miss this obvious part of psychical research and more importantly why hadn’t more people mentioned it to me in the past!
Telepathy is an intrinsic element of our world, but equally it’s like a forgotten art that we exclude on the basis that standard science has a little trouble explaining it. For example; have you ever picked up your mobile phone and began to text a loved one, only to have them ring you as you write the text? Have you ever felt the gaze of someone on you, only to turn around and have your eyes meet with another person staring right at you? More importantly perhaps, have you ever questioned the fact that whilst talking to a friend/colleague/loved one you understand more than is verbalised? These few examples are in my opinion and some others, good examples of probable telepathy.
A common misconception among many is that telepathy is all about mind reading. That is one individual reads the mind of another in order to discover information. I’ve encountered this belief in many occasions whilst working with mediums and often when I’ve used the term telepathy they’ve become a little insulted that I could attribute communication to mind reading. So, let’s go ahead and clear that up right now shall we! I see telepathy as the method in which communication occurs, that is to say for me it describes a type of communication between the source and the receiver. In the same way we hear what someone says when they speak out loud, information could also be transferred between our conscious or unconscious minds. However when we speak to one another, there is an intent or a reason for the conversation taking place. This transfer of information telepathically appears to occur both intentionally and unintentionally. The easiest way I can explain this is by means of what I call ‘the forgotten name’. I’m sure many of us have had a conversation about a film we may have watched in the past, but become stumped when we are unable to remember a character or actors name. At that recognition of our memories failing us, we try particularly hard to recall the name without success. In fact in my own experience and in the observation of others, the harder we try to recall the missing name the less we are able to do so. What’s odd about this situation is that when we stop thinking of name we are unable to recall, it often will come to us without warning and often to our surprise too. This very action in my opinion displays the very fact that our unconscious mind may continue to work on problems as we consciously continue with our day. It’s also this action that highlights the probable hidden activities our mind could achieve unbeknown to our conscious self. Hence why telepathic interaction is likely to occur in this way, travelling from conscious to unconscious mind and into the ether.
Of course beyond the interaction with ones subliminal self is the interaction which appears to occur between us all, possibly on a more regular occurrence than many of us may realise. Many of us currently understand the possibility of telepathic interaction as something that occurs on an ad-hoc basis, something that may take place when we wonder into a haunted location or perhaps when we are in the presence of a spiritual medium. However what if I told you that it’s my opinion and indeed belief that it’s occurring all the time and is actually built into our very being? As crazy as it sounds and some may think it is crazy, I don’t think I’m entirely alone on this understanding. The easiest way to explain this is to describe a general conversation you might have with someone, during which both parties verbalise the points their attempting to make. However if you step back and observe the conversation, you’ll quickly realise there’s more going on than simple speach. We often involves physical gestures in order to make our point, there’s always facial expressions which are imperative in order to define what we are saying, but also the speach itself also has varying tone in order to express points too. There’s a conversation hidden by the conversation so to speak and what I have mentioned is only the obvious expressions.
This is where the concept of Entangled Emotional Fields comes into play. Have you ever noticed that conversations with close friends or family, even those work colleagues we’ve spent a lot of time with, seem more often to be easier. They understand our point of view quicker and less effort is required to enable them to understand us. Obviously this is because they understand our mannerisms better from spending time with us, but equally it’s my assumption that through spending this time together we create an emotional bond which equally makes telepathic interaction more effective.
The reason I believe these kind of Entangled Emotional Fields occur is simply because as we spend time together we create memories together, those memories in themselves and no matter their content include an aspect of emotion which helps generate the energy associated with them. In the paranormal this kind of effect is often associated with the Stone Tape Theory and Residual Hauntings. An energy of a particular event imprints the details on a physical location, so that under the right circumstances that event is often played back like a video recording. Thus creating Ghosts which cannot be interacted with. Often these are events are singularly associated to negative traumatic events, such as an attack or murder. However I believe it may have been the great Ghost Hunter Andrew Green that believed that this could also occur with good memories and happy positive events too. A point of view I must agree with.
So, if it’s possible that the very energy of an event can imprint on a location like a recording or perhaps a memory, then it’s equally possible that the emotion of shared memories can help connect us and equally increase the possibility of telepathic interaction. Just as intent and attention is important, so is the emotional connection.
This in my opinion is shown quite well in the fact that many of us have encountered that strange moment where we have been thinking of a loved one only to have them phone us shortly thereafter. I believe Rupert Sheldrake has run studies on this too, I wonder if the results were better involving loved ones. I’ve experienced this personally myself when texting a loved one on my mobile phone, only to have them call as I am half way through said text. There’s even been documented stories of people who have thought of a friend whilst in a foreign city only to round a corner shortly after and bump into them. These in my opinion are good evidence for the existence of Entangled Emotional Fields working both locally, at a distance and void of time too. Think about that for second? Is there such thing as random events if all this is going on in the background? That’s something for another post I feel!
So, I guess before I close this post off I should really define my understanding of what I mean by Entangled Emotional Fields? Fundamentally I believe them to be a part of our human energy field, which each of us has during our lives. The field is rooted in our physical form (perhaps), but extends well beyond it through time and space. During our existence this field interacts with the fields of those we meet and in this fashion becomes connected to those individuals. The more time we spend with an individual the more their field becomes Entangled with ours, the stronger the connection becomes and the more likely that telepathic interaction may occur. However there does appear to be an additional aspect which overrides time spent in this theory, which is that of strong emotion. That’s to say that you could spend a short amount of time with one person, but if that period of time has a deep strong emotional value then that can create a strong bond too. Ergo you could spend 30 minutes with person A, but during that time be involved it a heated argument that your passionate about or engage in a passionate embrace; whilst you could spend 4 hours with person B discussing work. The Emotional Entanglement with person A would be stronger than person B due to the greater emotional exchange in a shorter period of time.
Of course it’s hard to prove the existence of these Entangled Emotional Fields, but I believe it’s a good possibility given the points I’ve discussed. Still, I would love to hear your point of view on this?
Thank you for reading and let’s be careful out there!
As a member of the Society of Psychical Research I attended their Gwen Tate Memorial Lecture on the 1st October, which was given by Dr. Zofia Weaver on ‘The Inconsistencies in Survival Evidence’. As ever the lecture was very interesting, well delivered by Zofia and an excellently detailed piece. Thank you Zofia. As ever I have left the lecture pondering even more questions in regards to psychical research, but I’m looking forward to researching those new questions.
However Zofia did touch on an area that has been on my own mind recently too, that’s understanding the evidence presented during communication (or telepathic interaction as I call it) needs to be verified, interpreted and possibly simplistically emotional.
The problem is that the information transferred during telepathic interactions is ‘noisey’, containing little or too much information. Where what we need is really little known or even unknown information, but information that can be verified. This is where the paradox comes into play, you see good telepathic interactions seem to occur where there are strong emotional bonds (family, friends, colleagues, etc.) transferring more detailed information. However because these emotional bonds exist it’s equally more possible that there is history between the Agent (information source like a spirit of friend) is full of information. Thus it’s possible the information is transferred between one persons to another, rather than from a deceased Agent.
So, basically in my opinion, we could take this paradox to the extreme. If the information transferred is known to anyone still living, then we could conclude that it may have been transferred from this person to the Automatist. This transfer could equally occur in close proximity as it could at a distance. Therefore we could verify the information and even interpret it, but if the same information can be verified and interpreted as related to a living individual then it’s more probable to conclude that the information is more from that person rather than someone deceased.
It’s a depressing thought as someone who spends a lot of time conducting psychical research, but in order to find the Holy Grail in the field and understand the survival hypothesis properly we must be certain of our source. As Dr Weaver stated we must rule out supernormal interactions as these kinds of entities are not verifiable. Just to clarify, we don’t dismiss them totally, but rule them out at this stage until we can understand interaction better.
This is where the paradox almost kills all hope. Unless I’ve missed something, it means that in order to prove survival we would need to have the piece of information communicated which is not known to anyone apart from the deceased communicator. Of course the only way to do this is for our hypothetical deceased communicator to store a piece of information prior to passing away, so we can verify it. The problem with this approach is that it can only be attempted once or many times over time, with the information being revealed on a certain date to compare against the data. This is nothing new really, just still requires a little patience. That idea leads to another post for another time, which may cover how this may be achieved.
Finally, if we receive a message via an Automatist that can be verified, we must equally assess the Automatists access to that information and probability they knew of it; this could redefine the worth of the message as evidence. Thus information transferred needs to be blind to the Automatist, simple, unique and probably emotional.
I wonder if we may stumble upon such an arrangement of information via telepathic interaction?
I’ve decided to add this section to my website / blog in order to share some of the ideas, thoughts, theories and general oddities that pass through my mind in regards to my personal psychical research. It’s a kind of mind dump to be honest, but also an opportunity to find out what those that actually read this think about the ideas too. Hopefully a discussion point if I’m lucky!
This website itself pretty much maps out the last ten years of my research and investigation of the paranormal, which in turn has lead me to want to understand more about telepathy and perhaps telekinesis in particular. The site also covers my main project of the moment, the Metetherial Project which investigates the concept of our consciousness surviving bodily death. However before we delve into that conundrum, I have also created the Cosmopathic Project to look into communication itself. It’s under this project that I am joined by friends to help me research and experiment in the very concepts of communication. This communication is better known as telepathy as it is literally the transference of information by means outside of the normal senses.
Oddly though the normal senses do seem to play a part, but often we find ourselves loosing trust in them! If this sounds a little odd, then let me explain. During our experiments we began by following the approach utilised in the Scole Experiment, working in a room which had so little light that often you couldn’t even see your hand in front of your face. In such an environment it would be logical to understand that as you settled you may pick up a few light anomalies caused by the minimal light accessing the room from somewhere. This was indeed the case, but later when we were settled and also a few experiments in some of the group began to experience various light anomalies. The reason that we lost trust in our own senses is because on the occasion these anomalies were seen, they were not seen by all. In a situation where more than one if not the whole group should be seeing these odd lights, often only one person would see them. The obvious answer to this is that the individuals eyes are adjusting differently and thus see lights. The problem was the behaviour of the lights didn’t fit this possibility, with the lights on occasion appearing as colours too.
It was experiences such as these which began to raise simple questions within the group and on some occasion rather more complex ones too. For example, am I seeing the light with my eyes or is the image a projection from my mind, which could be of my subliminal self or transferred to me by some unknown agent. Another thought pattern was, if I’m seeing this with my eyes, then is it appearing in some manner which is only accessible by me within my field of vision, but obscured from others. Personally I think these are also transfers of information from an agent to the Automatist which the mind processes as external images experienced in the present. If indeed they are, then how does that help with communication?
Of course this isn’t always the case, some light anomalies are experienced by many simultaneously which then gives us the perception that possibly we are seeing actual light move around a room in an odd fashion. Is it possible that each of these individuals has the same information transferred to their minds that in turn enables them to take part in the same experience? Personally I believe it is possible, especially if this is caused due to the presence of fields, which enable the telepathic interaction.
Often when we discuss communication we think initially of verbal conversations that allow us to understand each other, but actual communication is more complex than this. There’s various languages, the addition of hand gestures, facial expressions, how the verbal communication is delivered audibly, body language, the assumption that those communicating understand one another, physical touch, scent (good and bad) and the knowledge to understand the other person. However there is in my opinion also an element of telepathy too. An opinion which seems equally supported by Dr Rupert Sheldrake in his book ‘The Sense of Being Stared At’. Sheldrake, as indeed I do believe that we utilise an element of telepathy during general communication to assist us in understanding others better. Something which is made more apparent in those that have stronger emotional bonds, such as family, friends, etc. It’s most obvious in those situations where few words are used to explain something and those involved, just get it. Equally and more apparent is those times where even a facial expression allows you to totally understand what the other person is ‘saying’ even though nothing is actually said at all.
The annoying thing about those light anomalies is that we still don’t really understand what they are trying to communicate to us! During the Scole Experiment they were seen to buzz around the group, interacting with them, even passing through them at times and fundamentally presenting themselves as more than just light. It was almost as if they were little entities in their own right, with their form of communication being bouncing off the sitters and making patterns in the air. So, the communication itself may not have been complex in nature, but more of a confirmation of existence perhaps.
Of course there are other possibilities here which should be considered, the light anomalies could have equally been a kind of collective hallucination. Although I don’t mean in the usual concept of how we understand hallucinations. Perhaps in this instance the group all received information transferred from an agent collectively allowing them all to experience the light anomalies together.
Either way these light anomalies are curious and very interesting when they occur. They could be projections of our mind created through telepathic interaction and information transference, or strange occurrences that don’t fit reality quite right.
Something that might be worth further research and investigation I feel!
I recently attended the UK’s very first Paracon up in Derby where I delivered my presentation on the ‘Perception of Communication’. For those of you that know me I’m not a public speaker, so this opportunity wasn’t just something to help me face my fear of public speaking, but also a chance to speak about the subject that I am very passionate about.
Following on from Paracon UK 2014 and for your viewing pleasure, please feel free to check out my presentation by playing the video below. This is pretty much a rough cut, so apologies for sound quality.
Also, the guy on stage that stutters and almost falls over most of his words, is me.
Please let me know what you think or if you wish to know more? Thank you for watching.