What do you think?
Rate this book
What the Bleep Do We Know!?: Discovering the Endless Possibilities for Altering Your Everyday Reality
A fully illustrated, interactive guide explores the complicated, dense material of mysticism, philosophy, and quantum physics, boiling it down to easy to understand, practical advice. Movie tie-in. 100,000 first printing. $75,000 ad/promo.
274 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2005
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 178 reviews
July 21, 2011
I have read this and have watched the movie 13 times, each time I see/realize something that I missed before, I will watch it again and again many times still.
August 28, 2009
Ok, now this is what I'm talking about. This is a perfect example of an author taking perfectly healthy physics and turning it into a cult. By the time you finish this book, you feel as though you have been told, "All science aside......"
This book picks and chooses scientific phenomenon and takes them out of context in order to prove a point that no longer has science behind it. This book is a rape of good science and the physicists who work long and hard in its discovery.
When you get the psyche involved like this, and a bunch of people looking for alternate realities to believe in, you get What the Bleep Do We Know!? Valid experiments are twisted into accepting the paradox of Shrodinger's cat which was published for the purpose of pointing out that it is ridiculous to believe in such nonsense. Still, some people do. What the Bleep do We Know!? is a commentary to the paradox of Shrodinger's cat. It is saying, "Yeah! Isn't that the coolest thing?!" Duh.
This is probably the deepest state of fiction I have ever read. There is no nonfiction about this book and it should be categorized as such.
I literally read this book laughing my guts out. The only reason why I gave it two starts is because it was so funny. I'm surprised it was published for any other reason.
Any takers on this book don't get it.
This book picks and chooses scientific phenomenon and takes them out of context in order to prove a point that no longer has science behind it. This book is a rape of good science and the physicists who work long and hard in its discovery.
When you get the psyche involved like this, and a bunch of people looking for alternate realities to believe in, you get What the Bleep Do We Know!? Valid experiments are twisted into accepting the paradox of Shrodinger's cat which was published for the purpose of pointing out that it is ridiculous to believe in such nonsense. Still, some people do. What the Bleep do We Know!? is a commentary to the paradox of Shrodinger's cat. It is saying, "Yeah! Isn't that the coolest thing?!" Duh.
This is probably the deepest state of fiction I have ever read. There is no nonfiction about this book and it should be categorized as such.
I literally read this book laughing my guts out. The only reason why I gave it two starts is because it was so funny. I'm surprised it was published for any other reason.
Any takers on this book don't get it.
March 23, 2012
I saw the movie and decided that in order to digest the incredible amount of information presented, that I would do well to read the book. I wasn't sorry. This is a fascinating read and it made the movie come to life for me by reiterating the scientific principles introduced therein. I am not a scientist and most of this information was brand new to me, so having it presented in print as well as in video made it much more understandable and easier to study in depth (since it is easier to turn back the page than it is to reverse the movie). This book made such an impression on me that I bought a copy for my 86 year old mother and she devoured it, too! Quantum physics and its philosophical implications are real mind-benders. This really encouraged me to question a lot of long held assumptions and to begin exploring new ways of perceiving the world we live in.
April 4, 2008
The movie was also great. Maybe better than the book (one of the truly rare cases) and maybe it would be hard to get the book if you didn't watch the movie. Still, the concepts in the book are revolutionary and life changing. really, I have beased my entire conception of reality on some of the premisis asserted in this book. I like to think that I use quantum physics on a daily basis.
November 6, 2019
What the Bleep Do We Know : Discovering the Endless Possibilities for Altering Your Everyday Reality is a book that very enthusiastically tries to convey the message that, according to quantum mechanics, we can all affect our own realities/lives just by changing the way we think. And this doesn’t only change the way we perceive the world around us, but it actually changes the world itself, as is supposedly proven by the many ‘scientific’ experiments that the book brings forth, which are all very questionable ones, to say the least.
I understand the message that this book attempts to convey, and I can’t deny that there is some truth in certain parts of the book, and interesting points surrounding quantum theory are also discussed (not raised, since the things mentioned have practically been present ever since quantum theory surfaced). However, I can’t ignore the fact that a lot of scientific experiments and even scientists have been used in out-of-context manners in order to prove some deeper, spiritual meaning to the universe, mainly using the book’s version of quantum theory to back it all up.
At some points in the book, this shows a severe misunderstanding of the authors of several scientific theories and/or experiments. If this book wishes to solidify and/or prove its message, it should try to back it up with some actual research, but it only seems to rely heavily on questionable research that has yet to be reproduced by scientists other than the ones who initially preformed the experiments (and I doubt that anyone’s ever heard of double-blind in this book).
What the Bleep Do We Know : Discovering the Endless Possibilities for Altering Your Everyday Reality tries to link science and spirituality, yet both of these components seem far off in the book itself. Furthermore, it tries far too hard to push the message that we can all create our own awesome realities because we can physically change the world if we think hard enough, thanks to quantum physics! Which, of course, begs the question why we’re not all doing this already, especially since the book seems focused on the physicality of it and not only on the mentality of it (i.e. a lifestyle in which you improve your life by thinking differently, without physically affecting your surroundings).
So, this book seems to fail on both science and spirituality, and a basic understanding of several scientific theories and/or experiments. There are some things worth reading, but it doesn’t amount to much. I wouldn’t recommend it unless you’re curious about strange beliefs surrounding fake science, and fake spirituality.
I understand the message that this book attempts to convey, and I can’t deny that there is some truth in certain parts of the book, and interesting points surrounding quantum theory are also discussed (not raised, since the things mentioned have practically been present ever since quantum theory surfaced). However, I can’t ignore the fact that a lot of scientific experiments and even scientists have been used in out-of-context manners in order to prove some deeper, spiritual meaning to the universe, mainly using the book’s version of quantum theory to back it all up.
At some points in the book, this shows a severe misunderstanding of the authors of several scientific theories and/or experiments. If this book wishes to solidify and/or prove its message, it should try to back it up with some actual research, but it only seems to rely heavily on questionable research that has yet to be reproduced by scientists other than the ones who initially preformed the experiments (and I doubt that anyone’s ever heard of double-blind in this book).
What the Bleep Do We Know : Discovering the Endless Possibilities for Altering Your Everyday Reality tries to link science and spirituality, yet both of these components seem far off in the book itself. Furthermore, it tries far too hard to push the message that we can all create our own awesome realities because we can physically change the world if we think hard enough, thanks to quantum physics! Which, of course, begs the question why we’re not all doing this already, especially since the book seems focused on the physicality of it and not only on the mentality of it (i.e. a lifestyle in which you improve your life by thinking differently, without physically affecting your surroundings).
So, this book seems to fail on both science and spirituality, and a basic understanding of several scientific theories and/or experiments. There are some things worth reading, but it doesn’t amount to much. I wouldn’t recommend it unless you’re curious about strange beliefs surrounding fake science, and fake spirituality.
September 16, 2011
OK, I have no issue with the overall message of the book but there are some serious issues with the so-called science here, and it should be read with some big time caution. For starters, a lot of their experts are suspect. At one point they had an MD talking about quantum mechanics - what part of medical school prepares doctors to be experts in physics??? And I'd read afterwards that a few of their experts felt that what they'd said had been taken way out of context and twisted to support what the authors wanted to say.
If that weren't cause for concern, the authors also tend to make conclusions based on really bad science and crazy illogical leaps. They go on and on about the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, and how observing quantum particles changes their behaviour. My understanding was that the 'act of observing' refers to the energy used by the machine to pinpoint the location of the electron, not the act of the scientist thinking about finding the electron. A lot of the rest of their book rests on this mangling of the uncertainty principle. They also talk about the quantum physics of cell microtubules (think of them as a cell's "skeleton"). I admit I'm not a microtubule expert, but I was under the impression that all human cells had these, not just neurons. So I'm confused as to why the quantum physics of just microtubules (out of all the crazy chemicals and chemical reactions going on in cells) would have an impact on just neurons, even though all cell types have them...
Anyway, bad science rant aside, I also had to look up this Ramtha person they cite left, right and centre. Just be aware that apparently all three authors had some connection to Ramtha's school, which probably explains the over-emphasis on Ramtha and his/her ideas.
So read the book, feel empowered about your ability to control and change your life, be inspired by the message to look at old things in new ways, challenge your concept of reality... but don't put much faith in the "science" they use to back their ideas up. I know they've taken liberties with the science I am familiar with, which makes me seriously wonder about the science they cite that I'm not as familiar with.
If that weren't cause for concern, the authors also tend to make conclusions based on really bad science and crazy illogical leaps. They go on and on about the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, and how observing quantum particles changes their behaviour. My understanding was that the 'act of observing' refers to the energy used by the machine to pinpoint the location of the electron, not the act of the scientist thinking about finding the electron. A lot of the rest of their book rests on this mangling of the uncertainty principle. They also talk about the quantum physics of cell microtubules (think of them as a cell's "skeleton"). I admit I'm not a microtubule expert, but I was under the impression that all human cells had these, not just neurons. So I'm confused as to why the quantum physics of just microtubules (out of all the crazy chemicals and chemical reactions going on in cells) would have an impact on just neurons, even though all cell types have them...
Anyway, bad science rant aside, I also had to look up this Ramtha person they cite left, right and centre. Just be aware that apparently all three authors had some connection to Ramtha's school, which probably explains the over-emphasis on Ramtha and his/her ideas.
So read the book, feel empowered about your ability to control and change your life, be inspired by the message to look at old things in new ways, challenge your concept of reality... but don't put much faith in the "science" they use to back their ideas up. I know they've taken liberties with the science I am familiar with, which makes me seriously wonder about the science they cite that I'm not as familiar with.
February 4, 2022
A simple Google search of “what the bleep do we know controversy” is all you need to do to understand how unfounded and baseless the “theories” in this book are. I got about 50% of the way through this and just couldn’t do it anymore.
This book is strictly based off of pseudoscientific thought and written by and for students of the Ramtha School of Enlightenment (RSE) cult. Most of the scientists highlighted in the book/movie are also students/sympathizers of RSE and are also known for their own controversial pseudoscientific practices. Also worth mentioning, of the legitimate, notable scientists interviewed for this, they came out after the movie/book was released stating that they were grossly misrepresented and misquoted; bits and pieces of what they said was cut and pasted in different sections to make it seem like they were in support of these theories.
Not to mention that this is not the first time Vicente has fallen prey to extremely controversial cults (NXIVM). All three of the authors are students of RSE. I am so disappointed by this book, and movie, because my parents loved it so much and I was truly expecting to enjoy it.
This book is strictly based off of pseudoscientific thought and written by and for students of the Ramtha School of Enlightenment (RSE) cult. Most of the scientists highlighted in the book/movie are also students/sympathizers of RSE and are also known for their own controversial pseudoscientific practices. Also worth mentioning, of the legitimate, notable scientists interviewed for this, they came out after the movie/book was released stating that they were grossly misrepresented and misquoted; bits and pieces of what they said was cut and pasted in different sections to make it seem like they were in support of these theories.
Not to mention that this is not the first time Vicente has fallen prey to extremely controversial cults (NXIVM). All three of the authors are students of RSE. I am so disappointed by this book, and movie, because my parents loved it so much and I was truly expecting to enjoy it.
July 15, 2014
I am actually astounded by how many people like this book. After reading a boat load of books on layman's quantum theory, then reading this work, I smiled and laughed all the way through it. This book is twisting the thought experiments that are presented by quantum theorists, taking the entire concept, wadding it up into a neat little package then taking a giant leap from quantum theory into the macro universe. I've never seen such a leap of faith in either spiritualism OR scientific study. This book is absolutely foolish.
February 7, 2014
I should preface this by saying that when I first read this book five or six years ago, I completely bought into every claim it made. I mean I literally took for granted that these people had done their research and that somehow all of these amazing things had flown under the radar of science. If you had asked me at the time what I thought of it, I would probably have listed it in my top five favorite books and as the most influential book I had ever read.
As a chemistry major in college, I was fascinated by the claims made in the book, especially those that had to do with the "memory of water." I actually believed that water was the medium for all magick, and after reading this book I swore to make it my life's work to research the mechanism of this. I honestly thought I could be famous, possibly Nobel Prize famous.
There is one thing I must give this book credit for, and that is that it started my long journey into the world of scientific skepticism, true atheism, and rationality. As I researched the claims made in the book, I increasingly realized that no real scientists believe any of the claims, and that no good research had ever backed any of the claims. It was all anecdotal evidence and scam artistry.
This book is truly irresponsible, as it tricks gullible people who are curious about the deeper aspects of life into believing a litany of absurd things. It is basically anti-science and solipsism.
I intend to review this book at length once I have more time and have my thoughts in order. I plan to make use of all or nearly all of the 20,000 characters I am allowed.
As a chemistry major in college, I was fascinated by the claims made in the book, especially those that had to do with the "memory of water." I actually believed that water was the medium for all magick, and after reading this book I swore to make it my life's work to research the mechanism of this. I honestly thought I could be famous, possibly Nobel Prize famous.
There is one thing I must give this book credit for, and that is that it started my long journey into the world of scientific skepticism, true atheism, and rationality. As I researched the claims made in the book, I increasingly realized that no real scientists believe any of the claims, and that no good research had ever backed any of the claims. It was all anecdotal evidence and scam artistry.
This book is truly irresponsible, as it tricks gullible people who are curious about the deeper aspects of life into believing a litany of absurd things. It is basically anti-science and solipsism.
I intend to review this book at length once I have more time and have my thoughts in order. I plan to make use of all or nearly all of the 20,000 characters I am allowed.
September 11, 2012
Life changing for me. Hearing neuro- scientists, quantum physicists, and spiritualists talk about the same thing - consciousness - and where that boundary is, whether we can harness it, and what we can create if we do. If one truly thinks about "us" as humans relative to the universe (assuming size isn't just a complete construct), are we not just particles too? If you're not open or interested, why pursue reading something like this?
Reading the book actually made the movie even more enjoyable. Now I own the movie too.
April 19, 2009
Combination of New Age hog-wash and pseudo-science, poorly constructed, poorly written, poorly argued, poorly developed.
May 27, 2009
Will Arntz, a research physicist and spirtual seeker, and co-creator of the movie What the Bleep Do We Know!?, discusses his book What The Bleep Do We Know!?: Discovering the Endless Possibilities for Altering Your Everyday Reality.
With the help of more than a dozen research and theoretical scientists, this book takes readers through the looking glass of quantum physics into a universe that is more bizarre and alive than ever imagined. This science leads not just to the material world, but deep into the realm of spirituality, and offers mind stretching questions and details endless possibilities for individual reality.
We met William Arntz when he visited the Tattered Cover Bookstore in Denver. You can listen to him talk about What The Bleep Do We Know!?: Discovering the Endless Possibilities for Altering Your Everyday Reality here: http://www.authorsontourlive.com/?p=37
With the help of more than a dozen research and theoretical scientists, this book takes readers through the looking glass of quantum physics into a universe that is more bizarre and alive than ever imagined. This science leads not just to the material world, but deep into the realm of spirituality, and offers mind stretching questions and details endless possibilities for individual reality.
We met William Arntz when he visited the Tattered Cover Bookstore in Denver. You can listen to him talk about What The Bleep Do We Know!?: Discovering the Endless Possibilities for Altering Your Everyday Reality here: http://www.authorsontourlive.com/?p=37
October 4, 2019
Dit boek heb ik al bijna 13 jaar in de kast staan. Ik wilde dit boek echt heel erg graag hebben, dus toen ik uit dienst ging bij een voormalig werkgever en mijn collega's vroegen wat ik als afscheidscadeau wilde hebben zei ik dat ik dit boek wilde hebben. En ik was ook heel erg blij toen ik het kreeg. In die bijna dertien jaar ben ik meerdere keren in het boek begonnen, maar op de één of andere manier belandde het na verloop van tijd altijd weer onuitgelezen in de kast. Nu heb ik 'm eindelijk uit (hoera!) en blijkt dat het onderwerp mij eigenlijk helemaal niet boeit. Ik ben natuurlijk in de 13 jaar veranderd, ik kijk anders tegen het leven aan of heeft het onderwerp mij gewoon nooit geboeid en kreeg ik het daarom nooit uitgelezen?
January 31, 2011
This book will make you think. Wow! In depth look at quantum physics and then some. The movie has great graphics and is a lovely accompaniment.
Read
November 24, 2013alright i haven't read the book, but i watched the movie..and i just can't stop myself from posting a review here after knowing that there's also a book about what i just watched..so let's make it clear, this is a content review and not a book review. views expressed are all about the message and not the form. :)
As universal as the question of our origin is the question of reality. People are forever seeking the reality. Some try to find answers in religion, some in science, and some accept traditions told through generations, etc. Little do they know that they are the ones creating their own realities.
Amanda symbolizes millions of us who are unhappy and unsettled with our present lives – those who believe that there is more to life but do not know where to find it. Her deafness symbolizes our fettered state of mind. We accept only those we perceive as acceptable just like how she reads lips and gives meaning that is subject to her interpretation. We screen what we see as reality. As her life unravels, with the help of events and unusual characters, she learns the potential of thought and turns self-hate to self-love.
She meets with Duke Reginald at his “court of unending possibilities.” Here she learns that material objects are actually composed mostly of spaces and never touch each other. Matter as we first believed to be composed of solid atoms is actually not solid at the quantum level. It is composed of spaces where wave-like energy goes in and out of existence. Waves that are “more like a thought”. …just like the Strings Theory discussed in my school before.
If matter is thought or consciousness, then is it possible to alter matter’s composition just by thought? The answer according to Mr. Emoto’s experiment on water’s ice crystals is yes. He proved that the way people think (positive or negative), can change the chemical structure of water. After the scene, the audience is left with a thought-stimulating statement: “If thoughts can do that to water, imagine what thought can do to us” since our bodies are 90% water. Another proof of the power of thought is how meditation reduced crime rates as told by one of the scientists interviewed in the film. Thought is indeed that powerful, even god-like. And being able to think or having consciousness is inherent in all of us. It is just up to us how we will use it.
Many, like Amanda, failed to maximize their power of thought and create realities for themselves. This is because we select our realities from those that are familiar to us. And since “we are living in a world where all we see is the tip of the iceberg”, we are left with only a few possibilities. We fail to and oftentimes choose not to consider the infinite number of possibilities of reality. This is where our “idols” come into play. We feel uncomfortable with unfamiliar things and label them as non-existent or not possible. Just as how the Native Americans opted to not see Columbus’s ships. We need to do away with this immature state of mind and then take control our thoughts, our own realities.
Another problem is our “addictions”. We have the tendency to be addicted to certain peptides or neurotransmitters released by our brain. We associate certain emotions with things or events. We base them on past emotional experiences. Amanda in the story, associated churches with negative emotions because she was betrayed by her husband. She sees churches as a place full of lies and unfaithfulness, which is obviously not true. But since she is “addicted”, that is reality for her. We also need to avoid this way of thinking and be more rational.
We are not just beings determined by genetic coding, family, society and other external forces. It is actually the other way around. Who and what we think we are determines our being. It comes from inside, from our thoughts. We are beings who can make our own realities through our own choice.
As universal as the question of our origin is the question of reality. People are forever seeking the reality. Some try to find answers in religion, some in science, and some accept traditions told through generations, etc. Little do they know that they are the ones creating their own realities.
Amanda symbolizes millions of us who are unhappy and unsettled with our present lives – those who believe that there is more to life but do not know where to find it. Her deafness symbolizes our fettered state of mind. We accept only those we perceive as acceptable just like how she reads lips and gives meaning that is subject to her interpretation. We screen what we see as reality. As her life unravels, with the help of events and unusual characters, she learns the potential of thought and turns self-hate to self-love.
She meets with Duke Reginald at his “court of unending possibilities.” Here she learns that material objects are actually composed mostly of spaces and never touch each other. Matter as we first believed to be composed of solid atoms is actually not solid at the quantum level. It is composed of spaces where wave-like energy goes in and out of existence. Waves that are “more like a thought”. …just like the Strings Theory discussed in my school before.
If matter is thought or consciousness, then is it possible to alter matter’s composition just by thought? The answer according to Mr. Emoto’s experiment on water’s ice crystals is yes. He proved that the way people think (positive or negative), can change the chemical structure of water. After the scene, the audience is left with a thought-stimulating statement: “If thoughts can do that to water, imagine what thought can do to us” since our bodies are 90% water. Another proof of the power of thought is how meditation reduced crime rates as told by one of the scientists interviewed in the film. Thought is indeed that powerful, even god-like. And being able to think or having consciousness is inherent in all of us. It is just up to us how we will use it.
Many, like Amanda, failed to maximize their power of thought and create realities for themselves. This is because we select our realities from those that are familiar to us. And since “we are living in a world where all we see is the tip of the iceberg”, we are left with only a few possibilities. We fail to and oftentimes choose not to consider the infinite number of possibilities of reality. This is where our “idols” come into play. We feel uncomfortable with unfamiliar things and label them as non-existent or not possible. Just as how the Native Americans opted to not see Columbus’s ships. We need to do away with this immature state of mind and then take control our thoughts, our own realities.
Another problem is our “addictions”. We have the tendency to be addicted to certain peptides or neurotransmitters released by our brain. We associate certain emotions with things or events. We base them on past emotional experiences. Amanda in the story, associated churches with negative emotions because she was betrayed by her husband. She sees churches as a place full of lies and unfaithfulness, which is obviously not true. But since she is “addicted”, that is reality for her. We also need to avoid this way of thinking and be more rational.
We are not just beings determined by genetic coding, family, society and other external forces. It is actually the other way around. Who and what we think we are determines our being. It comes from inside, from our thoughts. We are beings who can make our own realities through our own choice.
October 22, 2012
You must have an open mind in order to really get something useful out of this book. It is a supplement to the movie of the same name and it's successor, "Down the Rabbit Hole." Delving into the mysterious world of quantum physics and it's many facets, this book explores the unknown from vantage points not pursued by modern scientists in general. In fact, much criticism surrounds it and its contributors.
I have a very open mind about most things, and this is one of them. However, I do not take much of the content to be absolute truth. I do not, however, regard the theories or proposals as pure hogwash either. There is always room for wonder. When backed up by some prominent names in the scientific community, more consideration must be given.
Regardless of whether or not you believe what is said in the book, it is an interesting read, albeit hard to get through at times due to massive thinking required. This is not to say it is hard to understand, it is just that you won't zip through the pages because you have to really think about what you are reading.
Skeptics will criticize, and perhaps condemn the material, but those with a mind for wondering and consideration of things we don't understand will enjoy a new perspective on the question of "Why are we here?" which is one of the major topics this book discusses.
One note that doesn't usually come up in a review of a book...construction. This is a very small book, but it's one of the heaviest books I've read. Reason? It is printed exclusively on photo-quality paper with a weight to match. Just an interesting note.
Pick it up and see the movie. You will be thinking more than you are used to. You'll either really enjoy it, or you'll just give up.
I have a very open mind about most things, and this is one of them. However, I do not take much of the content to be absolute truth. I do not, however, regard the theories or proposals as pure hogwash either. There is always room for wonder. When backed up by some prominent names in the scientific community, more consideration must be given.
Regardless of whether or not you believe what is said in the book, it is an interesting read, albeit hard to get through at times due to massive thinking required. This is not to say it is hard to understand, it is just that you won't zip through the pages because you have to really think about what you are reading.
Skeptics will criticize, and perhaps condemn the material, but those with a mind for wondering and consideration of things we don't understand will enjoy a new perspective on the question of "Why are we here?" which is one of the major topics this book discusses.
One note that doesn't usually come up in a review of a book...construction. This is a very small book, but it's one of the heaviest books I've read. Reason? It is printed exclusively on photo-quality paper with a weight to match. Just an interesting note.
Pick it up and see the movie. You will be thinking more than you are used to. You'll either really enjoy it, or you'll just give up.
July 13, 2016
A fascinating look that blends and compares the
makings of the universe, as science knows it, and spirituality.
'What the Bleep' originally appeared in movie form in 2004.
The creators, of the movie not the universe, then followed up
with this book, which goes further in examining the questions
of life, and well, everything.
The first half of the book concentrates on the science,
quantum physics, fortunately for me, in layman terms. The
second part delves into religion and spirituality. It wraps
up in a self-help context, though not with specific advice,
but in how the various questions raised can help you to make
sense of the world.
I liked the 'it makes you think' attitude. I see that my
library has a copy of the movie, can't wait to view it.
April 30, 2012
If you are a seeker or a wondered, just read. It is thought provoking and that is what it is meant to do. Don't take yourself or your beliefs too seriously. It is a mysterious universe. We will never have all the answers.
December 1, 2016
Why did I want to read this garbage?
October 5, 2019
What a fun book to read and learn at the same time!!! (wow, I sound like a parent...)
Well, it WAS, honestly. I remember reading it for fun because I like science stuff but I'm not the kind of person who would sit and read about them seriously...
But this was not boring at all!!!
Well, it WAS, honestly. I remember reading it for fun because I like science stuff but I'm not the kind of person who would sit and read about them seriously...
But this was not boring at all!!!
March 24, 2020
Mind blowing in a good way
August 11, 2018
I need to watch the movie again. This was a good reminder of the concepts, but the visuals and interviews make things stick even more. It's been over 10 years since I last saw the movie. Lots of stuff to practice once you understand the concepts. Practice, practice, practice.
"The goal of science in all these cultures was to gain knowledge in order to harmonize human life with the great forces of the natural world and the transcendent powers that all cultures sensed behind the physical world. People wanted to know how nature works, not in order to control and dominate it, but to live in accord with its ebb and flow." pg. 14
"Dr. Newberg continues: 'The brain has to screen out a tremendous amount of information that is really extraneous for us. It does that by inhibiting things. It does that by preventing certain responses and certain pieces of neural information from getting ultimately up into our consciousness, and by doing all of that, we ignore the chair that we're sitting in. That is, screening out the known. Then there's screening out the unknown . . . If we see something the brain can't quite identify, we grab onto something similar ("It's not a squirrel . . . but it's something just like that.") If there's nothing close, or it's something we know to not be real, we discard it with, "I must have been imagining things."'" pg. 54
"In Journey to Ixtlan, Carlos Castaneda recounts one of Don Juan's lessons: to 'Stalk Oneself.' In other words, to learn one's own habits like you were studying prey, so that you can trap yourself doing your habitual and do something totally new." pg. 57
"The bottom line, at least as far as science has gone up til now, is this: We create the world we perceive. When I open my eyes and look around, it is not 'the world' that I see, but the world my human sensory equipment is able to see, the world my belief system allows me to see, and the world that my emotions care about seeing or not seeing." pg. 57
"Memory (past) --> Perception --> Observation --> (affecting) Reality" pg. 85
"According to Dr. Dean Radin, there's a very good reason why we don't manifest things right away: 'Everything you do, everything you think, all your plans spread out and affect the universe. As it turns out, though, most of the universe doesn't care, and that's why our individual little thoughts don't immediately go out and change the universe as we see it. I can imagine that if that were the case, if each of us were so powerful that our fleeting whims would go out and affect the universe, we would go out and destroy ourselves almost instantly." pg. 119
"If all these theories prove to be correct, that means that an individual's consciousness is constantly scanning all the future possibilities, maybe even going into the future to 'taste' whether to marry someone or not, and then focusing, or collapsing that chosen possibility into reality. The 'how' gets handled by the immensely interactive superintelligent universe that automatically responds to consciousness because that's what it is. The universe IS the computer that keeps track--that's why it's here. And if it can create self-repliciting, self-conscious life forms, it can fix a flat tire.
And how does this view make creation more conscious? Well, to many people the future is on the other side of a great wall, past which they cannot go. So those possibilities lurking out there are not seen, and when they do show up it's a surprise, or a shock. But realizing that those potentials are real, and they can be developed, manipulated and collapsed, takes us over the wall and into the future where the new you awaits." pg. 134
"Who is the 'I' that is creating? If it's the personality, then the creations are from the existing structures, habits, propensities, neuronets, and from that old personality structure, all that will be created is the same old, same old. Creating what has already been is hardly creating.
Or creating is coming from the higher self, the God self, in which case it's usually unconscious and the workings of some deeply buried karma. So while the creations are wonderful to the spirit, to the disconnected personality, they seem arbitrary, unfair, and give rise to the feelings of powerlessness and victimization.
Whereas this technique takes advantage of the moment of no-self, or, new-self. From this 'I' something truly new can be manifested. Something that you consciously create. And to create this way forever undoes the trap of victimization and disempowerment." pg. 136-137
"But this excuse network comes crashing down if we accept that consciousness creates reality (CCR). This is the most practical aspect of CCR. It means that you have created your life and your world. You may bitch and moan because you can't seem to have what you want, when in fact, you do have what you want. You are living the life you chose to live, the life you believed you could live." pg. 143
"It is that the non-determinism of the quantum level of existence, the randomness and the fact that probability rather than absolute certainty governs quantum reality, gives us the only possibility for free will. . . . In short, says Satinover, 'Quantum mechanics allows for the intangible phenomenon of freedom to be woven into human nature. . . .The entire operation of the human brain is underpinned by quantum uncertainty.' This is because 'at every scale, from the cortex down to individual proteins,' the brain 'functions as a parallel processor. . . .These processes form a nested hierarchy, an entire parallel computer at one scale being but a processing element in the next larger one.'" pg. 161-162
"What this says is that by continually holding the same intention over and over and over, by posing the same question to the universe over and over and over, we change the quantum probability away from randomness. . . .But Dr. Stapp thinks that this phenomenon may show how the insubstantial 'mind' controls the very substantial brain: 'Quantum mechanics contains a specific mechanism that in principle allows mental effort to hold at bay strong forces arising from the mechanical side of nature, and allows mental intent to influence brain processes.'" pg. 164
"It's not surprising. It has been calculated that there are more possible connections in one human brain than there are atoms in the entire universe. Even in a small brain, the workings are incredible. It's been estimated that to solve the problem of a bird landing on a branch in the wind, the largest supercomputer would take days to calculate a solution, if it could. This problem may be computationally unsolvable. Yet bird brains do it all the time, and in no time." pg. 168
"Emotions help you. So emotions, which are themselves, in part, a neuronet, are tied into all the other neuronets. These connections allow the brain to find the most important memories first. They also insure that something important, like not putting your hand on the stove, is not quickly forgotten. It's why everyone remembers where they were and what they were doing when they heard about 9/11 and the World Trade Centers coming down, or President Kennedy being shot." pg. 174
"The downside with associative memory is that because we perceive reality, and treat new experiences based on our stored mental/neuronal database of the past, it's difficult to see what is really out there in the moment. Instead, the tendency is to just reference experiences from the past. This would seem to create a perpetual Groundhog Day, where the same old, same old happens day after day.
And who would the same old be happening to? Who would be reacting to situations based on the past? That vastly integrated cluster of neuronets that we've been calling 'the personality.' Just like all the cells of the body come together and interrelate with each other to produce a functioning organism, so the neuronets all interrelate, or associate, to produce that entity that we think of as our personality. All the emotions, memories, concepts and attitudes are encoded neurologically and interconnect, the result being what has been variously called the ego, the son of man, the lower self, the human, the personality." pg. 175
"What this says is that every emotion has a chemical [molecules of emotion] (MOE) associated with it, and it's the absorption of this chemical in our body by the cells that gives rise to the feeling of that emotion." pg. 186
"As Dr. Dispenza explains, 'We're making an analysis of every situation to determine if it's familiar, and that familiar feeling then becomes the means by which we predict a future event. Anything that has no feeling, we automatically discard or we reject because we can't relate to the feeling.'" pg. 189
"The very beauty of the stimulus and response shortcut is the very thing that seems to trap us. Instead of evaluating a truly new experience from a fresh perspective, we tend to assume it's an experience we've already had.
When the same chemical events repeat themselves over and over again, the result is a cumulative emotional history. This history comes with identifiable patterns and predictable responses, which become embedded or 'hardwired' in our brains.
That means our patterns and responses repeat without our having to think about them: stimulus-response-stimulus-response-stimulus-response. The survival shortcut mechanism becomes a trap into the same thing over and over." pg. 189
"Joe Dispenza says: 'Well, I don't have a scientific definition for soul, but what I will say is it is a register of all the experiences that we own emotionally. And the things that we don't own emotionally, we continuously re-experience in this reality, all other realities, in this life, all other lives. So, we don't get to evolve. If we keep re-experiencing the same emotion, and never retire that emotion into wisdom, we don't ever evolve as a soulful person. We're not inspired. You don't have the ambition or the desire to be anything else other than the product of the chemicals in our physical body that keep us on the wheel of living our genetic destiny.
A soulful person overcomes the genetic destiny, overcomes the feedback from the body, overcomes the environment, overcomes their emotional propensity. Think about it. You want to evolve as a person, pick one limitation that you know about yourself and consciously act to alter your propensities. You'll gain something. . .wisdom.'" pg. 191
"But, of course, we can't really blame the world for our lack of focus. That's victim mentality. Rather, in order to get really good at exercising intent, we must desire to get good at it and make the choice to develop it. It's a chain reaction with extraordinary results." pg. 215
"To change, we intend the change. Intention is the result of a decision (free will) to change, and that decision arises out of a desire to change.
You gotta want to change. We mean want to change, desire it like you desired your first . . whatever. For the material world, the world of matter, runs like a clock and resists change, while the unseen world of the spirit calls it forth. The choice is which world to live in." pg. 218
"So is ESP (extrasensory perception) some sort of spooky action? Dr. Radin finds that by looking at the entire range of ESP phenomena as different applications of entanglement, they are brought under a unified theory. 'Let's assume that experience is entangled, then how would it manifest? And we can start going through ways in which it would manifest. If there's a connection with other minds, call it telepathy; if there's a connection to some other object somewhere else, call it clairvoyance; if there's a connection that happens that transcends time, we call it precognition. If there's a connection in which my intention is expressed out in the world somewhere, you might call it psychokinesis or distant healing. So you can go through a list of perhaps twelve kinds of psychic experience that have gotten labels over the years like telepathy, but this is really just the tip of the iceberg.'" pg. 248
"Rupert Sheldrake is a biologist who began investigating the anomalies of biologic systems. In response he has developed: 'The Hypothesis of Formative Causation [which] states that the forms of self-organizing systems are shaped by morphic fields. Morphic fields organize atoms, molecules, crystals, organelles, cells, tissues, organs, organisms, societies, ecosystems, planetary systems, solar systems, galaxies. In other words, they organize systems at all levels of complexity, and are the basis for the wholeness that we observe in nature, which is more than the sum of the parts.'" pg. 253-254
"The Entangled Minds theory brings the curtain down on the discussion by saying that the life force is the morphic field, which is an aggregate of minds large and small on the viability of life itself. It says life is not just random mutations, but emerges from an ever evolving, non-physical source. Consciousness creating reality." pg. 257
"We know coherence does something. It somehow, some way pushes random quantum events around.
Coherent intent does something even more, to borrow Dr. Laszlo's words: 'It marks the full achievement of divine creativity.'" pg. 261
"Nevertheless, think of all the times you didn't do something because you might be wrong or fail. In science there is no such thing as a failed experiment. That experiment was successful--it told you that reality does not work that way." pg. 266
"'How can we say that we have lived fully every day by simply experiencing the same emotions that we're addicted to every day? What we're actually saying is, I have to reconfirm who I am, and my personality is, I have to do this, I have to go here, I have to be that. A master is quite a different cat. It is one that sees the day as an opportunity in time to create avenues of reality and emotions that are unborn, of realities that are unborn, that the day becomes a fertilization of infinite tomorrows.' -- Ramtha." pg. 268
"And you just gotta wonder, why do we have these tools? These talents? Either it's an accident of nature or it's why we're here. It's pretty much one or the other. Obviously, the thrust of this book has been on the 'it's why we're here' side. All the creations of humanity spring out of the abilities, the human potentials, that we are in possession of. And we have them for a reason, which we're all in the process of discovering.
We have the amazing brain--the most complex structure in the known universe--that can and does rewire itself to continually maximize whatever you want to experience. Whereupon the brain rewires in response to that new experience--all under your control. Then there's the body: self-healing, self-replicating, and let's face it, a thing of beauty. And the mind, which has the ability to delve into the tiniest corners of space and time and then get huge and contemplate the big bang. And beyond." pg. 270-271
"Is the observer going to be a meddling one who always meddles and tries to become the central part of the experience, or can the observer be a witness and let the experience unfold itself? Some traditions are very good at it. The Hopi Indians apparently don't have a word for 'I' or 'we.' They emphasize the verb, the happening. They would say raining, loving. See what is happening? Ordinarily I make love to this person, right? But instead, if I say: Loving is taking place; two people are involved. One me and one my significant other. And then what is happening is loving. There is no I, there is no it. It's just loving. See the beauty of that transition? - Amit Goswami, Ph.D." pg. 280
"The self-imposed limitations are the hardest, well-nigh impossible to see, for the creator is in the creation, and by this all limitations are realized. . . . 'The greatest problem we as a human race have is accepting our own greatness. We just do not want to do that. We run screaming from anybody who would suggest that we are all-powerful in ourselves. Therefore, we're not able to manifest what it is we would wish to have.
If we could only accept who and what we are, and the real power that we have, then what we call the miraculous, which has shone forth in unfortunately all too few individuals in the past, that'll become commonplace. And we would learn the new science of manifestation, which is to realize that we have always, twenty-four hours a day, three hundred sixty-five days a year, been creating our own reality. There are no new powers to be learned. We already have them. What we need to change is the type of life that we are creating for ourselves. (Miceal Ledwith)'" pg. 284
Book: borrowed from SSF Main Library.
"The goal of science in all these cultures was to gain knowledge in order to harmonize human life with the great forces of the natural world and the transcendent powers that all cultures sensed behind the physical world. People wanted to know how nature works, not in order to control and dominate it, but to live in accord with its ebb and flow." pg. 14
"Dr. Newberg continues: 'The brain has to screen out a tremendous amount of information that is really extraneous for us. It does that by inhibiting things. It does that by preventing certain responses and certain pieces of neural information from getting ultimately up into our consciousness, and by doing all of that, we ignore the chair that we're sitting in. That is, screening out the known. Then there's screening out the unknown . . . If we see something the brain can't quite identify, we grab onto something similar ("It's not a squirrel . . . but it's something just like that.") If there's nothing close, or it's something we know to not be real, we discard it with, "I must have been imagining things."'" pg. 54
"In Journey to Ixtlan, Carlos Castaneda recounts one of Don Juan's lessons: to 'Stalk Oneself.' In other words, to learn one's own habits like you were studying prey, so that you can trap yourself doing your habitual and do something totally new." pg. 57
"The bottom line, at least as far as science has gone up til now, is this: We create the world we perceive. When I open my eyes and look around, it is not 'the world' that I see, but the world my human sensory equipment is able to see, the world my belief system allows me to see, and the world that my emotions care about seeing or not seeing." pg. 57
"Memory (past) --> Perception --> Observation --> (affecting) Reality" pg. 85
"According to Dr. Dean Radin, there's a very good reason why we don't manifest things right away: 'Everything you do, everything you think, all your plans spread out and affect the universe. As it turns out, though, most of the universe doesn't care, and that's why our individual little thoughts don't immediately go out and change the universe as we see it. I can imagine that if that were the case, if each of us were so powerful that our fleeting whims would go out and affect the universe, we would go out and destroy ourselves almost instantly." pg. 119
"If all these theories prove to be correct, that means that an individual's consciousness is constantly scanning all the future possibilities, maybe even going into the future to 'taste' whether to marry someone or not, and then focusing, or collapsing that chosen possibility into reality. The 'how' gets handled by the immensely interactive superintelligent universe that automatically responds to consciousness because that's what it is. The universe IS the computer that keeps track--that's why it's here. And if it can create self-repliciting, self-conscious life forms, it can fix a flat tire.
And how does this view make creation more conscious? Well, to many people the future is on the other side of a great wall, past which they cannot go. So those possibilities lurking out there are not seen, and when they do show up it's a surprise, or a shock. But realizing that those potentials are real, and they can be developed, manipulated and collapsed, takes us over the wall and into the future where the new you awaits." pg. 134
"Who is the 'I' that is creating? If it's the personality, then the creations are from the existing structures, habits, propensities, neuronets, and from that old personality structure, all that will be created is the same old, same old. Creating what has already been is hardly creating.
Or creating is coming from the higher self, the God self, in which case it's usually unconscious and the workings of some deeply buried karma. So while the creations are wonderful to the spirit, to the disconnected personality, they seem arbitrary, unfair, and give rise to the feelings of powerlessness and victimization.
Whereas this technique takes advantage of the moment of no-self, or, new-self. From this 'I' something truly new can be manifested. Something that you consciously create. And to create this way forever undoes the trap of victimization and disempowerment." pg. 136-137
"But this excuse network comes crashing down if we accept that consciousness creates reality (CCR). This is the most practical aspect of CCR. It means that you have created your life and your world. You may bitch and moan because you can't seem to have what you want, when in fact, you do have what you want. You are living the life you chose to live, the life you believed you could live." pg. 143
"It is that the non-determinism of the quantum level of existence, the randomness and the fact that probability rather than absolute certainty governs quantum reality, gives us the only possibility for free will. . . . In short, says Satinover, 'Quantum mechanics allows for the intangible phenomenon of freedom to be woven into human nature. . . .The entire operation of the human brain is underpinned by quantum uncertainty.' This is because 'at every scale, from the cortex down to individual proteins,' the brain 'functions as a parallel processor. . . .These processes form a nested hierarchy, an entire parallel computer at one scale being but a processing element in the next larger one.'" pg. 161-162
"What this says is that by continually holding the same intention over and over and over, by posing the same question to the universe over and over and over, we change the quantum probability away from randomness. . . .But Dr. Stapp thinks that this phenomenon may show how the insubstantial 'mind' controls the very substantial brain: 'Quantum mechanics contains a specific mechanism that in principle allows mental effort to hold at bay strong forces arising from the mechanical side of nature, and allows mental intent to influence brain processes.'" pg. 164
"It's not surprising. It has been calculated that there are more possible connections in one human brain than there are atoms in the entire universe. Even in a small brain, the workings are incredible. It's been estimated that to solve the problem of a bird landing on a branch in the wind, the largest supercomputer would take days to calculate a solution, if it could. This problem may be computationally unsolvable. Yet bird brains do it all the time, and in no time." pg. 168
"Emotions help you. So emotions, which are themselves, in part, a neuronet, are tied into all the other neuronets. These connections allow the brain to find the most important memories first. They also insure that something important, like not putting your hand on the stove, is not quickly forgotten. It's why everyone remembers where they were and what they were doing when they heard about 9/11 and the World Trade Centers coming down, or President Kennedy being shot." pg. 174
"The downside with associative memory is that because we perceive reality, and treat new experiences based on our stored mental/neuronal database of the past, it's difficult to see what is really out there in the moment. Instead, the tendency is to just reference experiences from the past. This would seem to create a perpetual Groundhog Day, where the same old, same old happens day after day.
And who would the same old be happening to? Who would be reacting to situations based on the past? That vastly integrated cluster of neuronets that we've been calling 'the personality.' Just like all the cells of the body come together and interrelate with each other to produce a functioning organism, so the neuronets all interrelate, or associate, to produce that entity that we think of as our personality. All the emotions, memories, concepts and attitudes are encoded neurologically and interconnect, the result being what has been variously called the ego, the son of man, the lower self, the human, the personality." pg. 175
"What this says is that every emotion has a chemical [molecules of emotion] (MOE) associated with it, and it's the absorption of this chemical in our body by the cells that gives rise to the feeling of that emotion." pg. 186
"As Dr. Dispenza explains, 'We're making an analysis of every situation to determine if it's familiar, and that familiar feeling then becomes the means by which we predict a future event. Anything that has no feeling, we automatically discard or we reject because we can't relate to the feeling.'" pg. 189
"The very beauty of the stimulus and response shortcut is the very thing that seems to trap us. Instead of evaluating a truly new experience from a fresh perspective, we tend to assume it's an experience we've already had.
When the same chemical events repeat themselves over and over again, the result is a cumulative emotional history. This history comes with identifiable patterns and predictable responses, which become embedded or 'hardwired' in our brains.
That means our patterns and responses repeat without our having to think about them: stimulus-response-stimulus-response-stimulus-response. The survival shortcut mechanism becomes a trap into the same thing over and over." pg. 189
"Joe Dispenza says: 'Well, I don't have a scientific definition for soul, but what I will say is it is a register of all the experiences that we own emotionally. And the things that we don't own emotionally, we continuously re-experience in this reality, all other realities, in this life, all other lives. So, we don't get to evolve. If we keep re-experiencing the same emotion, and never retire that emotion into wisdom, we don't ever evolve as a soulful person. We're not inspired. You don't have the ambition or the desire to be anything else other than the product of the chemicals in our physical body that keep us on the wheel of living our genetic destiny.
A soulful person overcomes the genetic destiny, overcomes the feedback from the body, overcomes the environment, overcomes their emotional propensity. Think about it. You want to evolve as a person, pick one limitation that you know about yourself and consciously act to alter your propensities. You'll gain something. . .wisdom.'" pg. 191
"But, of course, we can't really blame the world for our lack of focus. That's victim mentality. Rather, in order to get really good at exercising intent, we must desire to get good at it and make the choice to develop it. It's a chain reaction with extraordinary results." pg. 215
"To change, we intend the change. Intention is the result of a decision (free will) to change, and that decision arises out of a desire to change.
You gotta want to change. We mean want to change, desire it like you desired your first . . whatever. For the material world, the world of matter, runs like a clock and resists change, while the unseen world of the spirit calls it forth. The choice is which world to live in." pg. 218
"So is ESP (extrasensory perception) some sort of spooky action? Dr. Radin finds that by looking at the entire range of ESP phenomena as different applications of entanglement, they are brought under a unified theory. 'Let's assume that experience is entangled, then how would it manifest? And we can start going through ways in which it would manifest. If there's a connection with other minds, call it telepathy; if there's a connection to some other object somewhere else, call it clairvoyance; if there's a connection that happens that transcends time, we call it precognition. If there's a connection in which my intention is expressed out in the world somewhere, you might call it psychokinesis or distant healing. So you can go through a list of perhaps twelve kinds of psychic experience that have gotten labels over the years like telepathy, but this is really just the tip of the iceberg.'" pg. 248
"Rupert Sheldrake is a biologist who began investigating the anomalies of biologic systems. In response he has developed: 'The Hypothesis of Formative Causation [which] states that the forms of self-organizing systems are shaped by morphic fields. Morphic fields organize atoms, molecules, crystals, organelles, cells, tissues, organs, organisms, societies, ecosystems, planetary systems, solar systems, galaxies. In other words, they organize systems at all levels of complexity, and are the basis for the wholeness that we observe in nature, which is more than the sum of the parts.'" pg. 253-254
"The Entangled Minds theory brings the curtain down on the discussion by saying that the life force is the morphic field, which is an aggregate of minds large and small on the viability of life itself. It says life is not just random mutations, but emerges from an ever evolving, non-physical source. Consciousness creating reality." pg. 257
"We know coherence does something. It somehow, some way pushes random quantum events around.
Coherent intent does something even more, to borrow Dr. Laszlo's words: 'It marks the full achievement of divine creativity.'" pg. 261
"Nevertheless, think of all the times you didn't do something because you might be wrong or fail. In science there is no such thing as a failed experiment. That experiment was successful--it told you that reality does not work that way." pg. 266
"'How can we say that we have lived fully every day by simply experiencing the same emotions that we're addicted to every day? What we're actually saying is, I have to reconfirm who I am, and my personality is, I have to do this, I have to go here, I have to be that. A master is quite a different cat. It is one that sees the day as an opportunity in time to create avenues of reality and emotions that are unborn, of realities that are unborn, that the day becomes a fertilization of infinite tomorrows.' -- Ramtha." pg. 268
"And you just gotta wonder, why do we have these tools? These talents? Either it's an accident of nature or it's why we're here. It's pretty much one or the other. Obviously, the thrust of this book has been on the 'it's why we're here' side. All the creations of humanity spring out of the abilities, the human potentials, that we are in possession of. And we have them for a reason, which we're all in the process of discovering.
We have the amazing brain--the most complex structure in the known universe--that can and does rewire itself to continually maximize whatever you want to experience. Whereupon the brain rewires in response to that new experience--all under your control. Then there's the body: self-healing, self-replicating, and let's face it, a thing of beauty. And the mind, which has the ability to delve into the tiniest corners of space and time and then get huge and contemplate the big bang. And beyond." pg. 270-271
"Is the observer going to be a meddling one who always meddles and tries to become the central part of the experience, or can the observer be a witness and let the experience unfold itself? Some traditions are very good at it. The Hopi Indians apparently don't have a word for 'I' or 'we.' They emphasize the verb, the happening. They would say raining, loving. See what is happening? Ordinarily I make love to this person, right? But instead, if I say: Loving is taking place; two people are involved. One me and one my significant other. And then what is happening is loving. There is no I, there is no it. It's just loving. See the beauty of that transition? - Amit Goswami, Ph.D." pg. 280
"The self-imposed limitations are the hardest, well-nigh impossible to see, for the creator is in the creation, and by this all limitations are realized. . . . 'The greatest problem we as a human race have is accepting our own greatness. We just do not want to do that. We run screaming from anybody who would suggest that we are all-powerful in ourselves. Therefore, we're not able to manifest what it is we would wish to have.
If we could only accept who and what we are, and the real power that we have, then what we call the miraculous, which has shone forth in unfortunately all too few individuals in the past, that'll become commonplace. And we would learn the new science of manifestation, which is to realize that we have always, twenty-four hours a day, three hundred sixty-five days a year, been creating our own reality. There are no new powers to be learned. We already have them. What we need to change is the type of life that we are creating for ourselves. (Miceal Ledwith)'" pg. 284
Book: borrowed from SSF Main Library.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 19, 2021
И все-таки человеческий мозг был создан так, чтобы люди имели возможность духовной трансформации и пришли к просветлению, - он обладает нейропластичностью.
June 4, 2009
The worst part of this book is decisively the title. And maybe the format. And maybe the lack of index (I really would've appreciated this). But I suppose the lack of organization really drives home the point of the book: what you perceive really isn't what is. Frankly, the questions given and answers offered in this book (although they're really foundations for you to derive your own answers) will matter to less people than the number of people it will piss off. But it really succinctly crams in new-age concepts, quantum & mechanical physics, mechanistics & metaphysical, and standard scientific disciplines all the while making it comprehensible to the armchair philo-seeker. Sprinkled with just enough spite against both organized religion & organized science and the un-wizarding of us by modern society to get my adrenalin in a 2-step with newly-created neuronets.
"Closing the eyes and visualizing the object produce the same brain patterns as actually looking at the object," and emotions are just as closely tied to what we see as what we think is tied to what we see--when was the last time we doubted what we see? A whole big chunk about the evolution from the Newtonian model to quantum physics. A great primer for anyone that's not upset by the fact we still rely on a model that was disproved 400 years ago (but then again, I also agree with Buddhism's allocation of two truths: real & conventional, both of equal importance, so I'm not too upset).
The climax of the book (and climax is relative because this reads more like a fun textbook than a novel) is the application of quantum physics to consciousness. The reason why there's such a passionate (you might say cult) lay following of quantum physics is because it's not reductionist. It aims to find a simplified theory uniting all of reality, but is intrinsically probabilistic. Probability implies free will, at least in the collapse of that initial probability, so that obviously appeals to folks. At the same time, it also implicitly makes room for an intelligent consciousness that cannot be measured & removes much basis for division between science & religion.
Unlike other new-agey books, this book really throws down the gauntlet with scientific experiments done with intent of demonstrating the old saying "mind over matter." Random event generators, intention imprinting electron devices, testing physiological response of one person when stimulating someone else in another room all come out of the woodworks to add muscle to bravado.
Most people give spiritual books a bad rap & pull out the "c" word (cult) on contact, but none of the ideas offered by spirituality books I've read exclude anyone, whereas I know plenty of organized religions that do. They open the mind to questioning & expansion & empower us to answer them ourselves. Mostly, this book is about creating your own reality and gives you plenty of scientific reasons to believe it's really up to you.
"Closing the eyes and visualizing the object produce the same brain patterns as actually looking at the object," and emotions are just as closely tied to what we see as what we think is tied to what we see--when was the last time we doubted what we see? A whole big chunk about the evolution from the Newtonian model to quantum physics. A great primer for anyone that's not upset by the fact we still rely on a model that was disproved 400 years ago (but then again, I also agree with Buddhism's allocation of two truths: real & conventional, both of equal importance, so I'm not too upset).
The climax of the book (and climax is relative because this reads more like a fun textbook than a novel) is the application of quantum physics to consciousness. The reason why there's such a passionate (you might say cult) lay following of quantum physics is because it's not reductionist. It aims to find a simplified theory uniting all of reality, but is intrinsically probabilistic. Probability implies free will, at least in the collapse of that initial probability, so that obviously appeals to folks. At the same time, it also implicitly makes room for an intelligent consciousness that cannot be measured & removes much basis for division between science & religion.
Unlike other new-agey books, this book really throws down the gauntlet with scientific experiments done with intent of demonstrating the old saying "mind over matter." Random event generators, intention imprinting electron devices, testing physiological response of one person when stimulating someone else in another room all come out of the woodworks to add muscle to bravado.
Most people give spiritual books a bad rap & pull out the "c" word (cult) on contact, but none of the ideas offered by spirituality books I've read exclude anyone, whereas I know plenty of organized religions that do. They open the mind to questioning & expansion & empower us to answer them ourselves. Mostly, this book is about creating your own reality and gives you plenty of scientific reasons to believe it's really up to you.
October 12, 2008
Besides all the "you can create your own day" jargon, it's actually a great read. I started it on a school night, and finished it just before school started. It definately requires a lot of re-reading of certain sections. The aspect of basic quantum mechanics, neurology, and cellular behaviour is interesting to anyone without much knowledge in the related fields. I particularly enjoyed the sections about the brain and chemical reactions which occur within us. It is also interesting to note that this book single handedly got me interested into some of the basic theories behind quantum physics. As I've learned from a quote in this book, "The more you learn about quantum physics, the less you know."
I definately would suggest watching the video documentary prior to reading the novel. The documentary is less in depth and will give you a broader understanding of some of the concepts before it is discussed in such detail within the novel.
I definately would suggest watching the video documentary prior to reading the novel. The documentary is less in depth and will give you a broader understanding of some of the concepts before it is discussed in such detail within the novel.
August 25, 2013
Una de las peores porquerías que han llegado a caer en mis manos. Mezcla ideas pseudocientíficas con ideas new age que no tienen ningún sentido. Habla de auras, extraterrestres etc y los mezcla con "física de partículas" el entrecomillado es porque aunque se refieren a ideas científicas las malinterpretan totalmente.
Por ejemplo se dice que la única cosa que hace que no podamos afectar el comportamiento de algo del tamaño de un edificio con nuestra mirada es que "no sabemos mirar"...
Lo peor de todo con diferencia son las notas al borde de las páginas de BETSY, diciendo por ejemplo que los conflictos entre ciencia y religión se pueden solucionar con terapia matrimonial.
Usan trozos de frases de científicos reputados para apoyar toda esta sarta de sandeces lo cual no solo es triste sino una falta de respeto a gente que ha empleado su vidaa a intentar descubrir como funcionan realmente las cosas.
Por ejemplo se dice que la única cosa que hace que no podamos afectar el comportamiento de algo del tamaño de un edificio con nuestra mirada es que "no sabemos mirar"...
Lo peor de todo con diferencia son las notas al borde de las páginas de BETSY, diciendo por ejemplo que los conflictos entre ciencia y religión se pueden solucionar con terapia matrimonial.
Usan trozos de frases de científicos reputados para apoyar toda esta sarta de sandeces lo cual no solo es triste sino una falta de respeto a gente que ha empleado su vidaa a intentar descubrir como funcionan realmente las cosas.
March 12, 2015
A major accomplishment in understanding quantum physics and consciousness. A hundred years of scientific debate is revealed with experts in Quantum Physics, Neurologists, Psychologists and other multi-disciplinary scientists eager to find out answers to age old questions... Its an open debate ... with unlimited possibilities... This is just the start of a fresh approach to understand reality without compartmentalizing science and spirituality... and seeking answers as a collective enquiry from all of human knowledge...
April 19, 2013
The ideas presented were not quite as revealing and arcane as I thought they would be, although the author certainly tries to present them that way. Sure, scientific concepts can seem strange at times but this book takes them to a new level of strange, even an unnecessary level. But it was still fun to read and think about so I can say I liked it. It had a message worth reading and thinking about but presented in an overly dramatic way.
June 30, 2012
Designed to instill doubt in order to sell pseudoscience and nonsensical notions on spirituality (e.g. God of the gaps, etc...) to much rubbish.
The best thing about this book? I got Amazon to recategorize it out of the science section. Win.
The best thing about this book? I got Amazon to recategorize it out of the science section. Win.
May 31, 2014
I can't believe I read this book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 178 reviews