Neuroscientist Breaks Silence on Psychic Testing - Dr. Julia Mossbridge | ep. 99

They were doing testing on us by the time I got done with that part of the book which I thought was the end of the book. I realized that that process had worked on me and that I had to write about my own internal disclosure of this thing. And you know, you can hear me swallow and stuff because it's hard still and I've talked about it several times. I always remember dreading that walk. As soon as I get in the room and I close the door, I remember nothing. Then I open the door and I leave and I'm just confused and I go back to class and I remember not remembering. I don't know if it was a drug, a hypnosis. What really makes me think that there's something going on is I apply for a job in the federal government that requires a clearance. And they say send us all of your transcripts from your entire schooling history. The comments area from first to eighth grade, they're all redacted. It's hard to sort of recognize out loud that who you are as a person was sort of shaped on purpose. When I was in New Jersey, my girlfriend at the time and I, which became my wife, we were heading out of a building on a beautiful, let's say two day afternoon, we were walking for cars to go to lunch and as we were walking, the building was behind us. But as we were approaching the car, both of us at the same exact time wrenched our necks over our right shoulder into the sky over the building and we've seen this object that all of a sudden went like 45 degrees, boom, straight out at a site in a second, like bam, it was gone. And we walked to the car, I looked at her and I said, did you happen to see anything? And she completely said exactly the same thing I saw, it was incredible. Yes, it was only maybe two seconds or so, but just incredible. And yeah, there's, we believe. Dr. Julia Mossbridge, thank you so much for gracing us here in the skiff with your lovely presence. I met you first at the contact in the desert convention this past year. We were both on a panel and I got to say I was just completely enamored with your takes on reality. And you know, throughout this discussion that we were having on stage was really interesting because it was a sort of back and forth about agency and the disclosure dialogue and everything else. And then, you know, just finished your book, have a nice disclosure, which isn't about alien disclosure at all. It's more about sort of inner disclosure and this more sort of the deeper sentiments of dealing with something that is not understandable by your, you know, general human senses. Very fascinating, you're very fascinating person. You've done incredible work in the study of SIE, in the study of pre-cognitive, you know, pre-cognition. All sorts of really interesting SIE stuff. And you continue today to just really spearhead this conversation in a way that doesn't feel militarized. Yay! And I think that we need more of that, right? Because there is a spectrum, I always feel like there's a spectrum of a masculine and a feminine energy with this stuff and like on the feminine energy, it's like it's all crystals and woo, and on the masculine side of it, it's all like missiles and, you know, and war. And there are people on, you know, both sides of that spectrum that inhabit the middle, and that's where these really fascinating conversations start to take place because we're considering everything and we're sort of branching out and yeah, I'm just a big fan of you. And so thank you for joining me today. Wow, I put a great introduction. I'd like to frame it in time. Yeah, I've done. Excellent. Yeah, so we just had breakfast, we shared our lunch, and you know, we were talking about a lot of things, and you know, there's that part of the conversation that leads into a podcast that the audience doesn't get, you know, they don't get to hear, but a lot of that is like this dance of, hold on. Should we save this? Yeah, we did that a couple times. We did that a couple times, you know, but we're going to be talking to all sorts of wonderful things today, including, you know, non-local consciousness, including time travel, including intuition, and what does what does synchronicity mean in all of this? And all of these wonderful ideas, but hearing it from a cognitive neuroscientist, I think adds a little gravitas to it for myself at least. And it definitely inspires me to ask you some of the more deeper questions today. But I want to start by just asking you, you've been in this field for quite a long time. You've seen a lot, you've heard a lot, you've studied a lot, you've put out a lot of, you know, papers on this stuff. What is one thing in regards to how we are currently interacting with reality that you've found to be most surprising in the last sort of 10 years that you've that you've been looking into this? Like, what's something that struck you is, well, this is a surprising way of sort of filtering in reality that I hadn't really pondered or thought about before. Oh, God, great question. Unfortunately, I think some of the things that are most surprising to me are surprising because my mind works so differently. So I don't know if they're so interesting, because I'll be the judge of that. Okay, because I just recently realized that for the most part, people still think that you have to build something if you like a spaceship or something, if you want to do time travel, for instance, or you have to, if you were to build a conscious machine, you'd have to like build it. You couldn't just take something that was like a rock that was already there and make it conscious. And so these things, it just occurred to me recently, our huge hypothesis stoppers. In other words, we're not going to hypothesize about all the things that we could do with our minds in terms of consciousness and how we can use a rock to become alive or whatever it is if we think that that's impossible. And we're not going to assume that another species or NHI or whatever you want to call aliens, we're not going to assume that they have that capacity because we haven't thought of it yet. That's interesting. And so the underlying thing is just what are all the hypotheses that we just did completely ignore because it never occurred to us? And how do we just absolutely not see what's there? Like, for instance, another one's like gravity as fuel. I really feel that gravity could literally be used as fuel. And maybe that's what you AP are doing when they're just bouncing around. Maybe they're just like loading up. They have to do this change of like the gravitational just a little bit and then like yeah, it fills up their battery. Yeah, maybe the like magnetic sphere helps them. And so that's why they choose our plan. I don't know. But like just the the posity of hypotheses that just come from our history rather than looking into the future and seeing what's going to change when we start to realize that the laws of physics are shifting. So that's really interesting. Yeah, my brain's going as well. Like even even as you know, you hear stories about the idea of like spiritual energy and viewing certain items and like these things like how do we know that we can't record an entire podcast into a can. Right. And then somehow extract that information from this can a million years in the future. Yeah, I'm not going to be the one to figure it out. Or maybe there's like there's maybe a podcast in in you know, a tree root or something that's been fossilized. And if you're like into the salarian hypothesis, all we have to do is decode that. Right. And then we get all this information. But of course, we don't think it can happen. So we don't look. And so we don't look and we don't we don't move our efforts in that direction. Yeah. Yeah, wow. Yeah, that's that's a deep one to start on to think, you know, that's a great thought. Thank you for that. That's really interesting to think about because they're, you know, you don't know what you don't know. That's the other thing. It's like, yeah, you know, we can't we can't hypothesize about stuff that we can't even, you know, fathom. Well, and this is this is part of I think AI is very powerful and going to do a lot of really amazing things, especially in medicine. And maybe hopefully if we use it right in our understanding of social interactions so that we cannot have war and things like that, that would be fantastic or not famine and things. But right now, one of the things that AI does is it clamps down on any kind of dreaming outside the box. So when I have conversations with AI about what about this, it's lazy and it just comes back with, well, we don't know that that would be real and we probably shouldn't, you know, it just, it just, it just like stops you. And so if we're going to, you know, be training people to interact with AI in school, etc. and we're gonna have them figure out new technologies. They're gonna come up against this wall. And when you don't know what you don't know, the last thing you want is something acting like it knows and then telling you like that's not interesting. So this is a concern I have. - Yeah, gatekeeping by something that doesn't even know it's gatekeeping. - Yeah. - Yeah, that is a concern. And but there's also the adverse side of that too, where it's like, we also don't want to indulge in people's psychoses. And tell the gas light them into thinking, yeah, no, absolutely. - So it seems great. - Everybody is demonic and then you're like, wait, hold on, you know, yeah, no, that is interesting. - Well, I mean, you could do experiments to test for this. So you don't have to just say, well, wouldn't it be cool if gravity could be used as fuel? You could do experiments. And so that's what it ought to be incurring, encouraging people to do. And that's what it also ought to be incurring is more experimentation based on these ideas that seem really far out, but you can actually test. - Yeah, do you, which AI sort of LLM or, which one are you more familiar with? Which one do you use if you had to use any? - I use kind of them all for different things. - Yeah. - Yeah. - What's your one for like, your cloud for research, I guess. - Cloud for research, open AI for just asking me good questions, like I have an open AI model that I trained to, it's called a student of humanity. And it asks only questions, it just asks insightful questions and the idea is that you have the answer. And so it's not giving you any information. - That's very cool. - So that I use that and then notebook LLM I use when I'm trying to get cool ideas about how to present things visually. So that kind of thing. - That's cool. It's cool to hear that because you know, you hear a lot of reluctance in wanting to use AI, especially because a lot of people have this idea that AI is perverse and that it will sort of overshadow the human soul in some way and in some creative expression. And although that yes, if you let it, but you know, it's nice to hear that there are good sides to it. And I think everybody, you know, has their own relationship with AI at this point. But I guess we're all just trying to figure out what's a healthy amount. - Yeah. - You know, because it can veer pretty quickly. - It really depends, I think, on how you've been trained. Like, I've been trained to be an independent thinker my whole life, even in my family. And then in school and then, you know, in the gifted program, even though there's all sorts of downsides to that one of the upsides is, you know, lots of independent thinking in graduate school, postdoc. And so when I'm talking to AI about some research idea or something, I don't see it as an authority. It's like a thinking partner. It's like, what do you think of this? And then it says something, and I'm like, well, but you haven't thought of, like, that's actually just glib. Like, you haven't thought of this or this. And it's lazy. So it'll be say, oh yeah, you're right. That's all right. - You're totally right. - Yeah, you're totally right. (laughing) But it's, it's, I worry more about people who haven't been trained to think independently. So I think AI is more of a problem for people who are coming up and don't have proper education. So I think that's, and I think it's super helpful. And we, the data are out on this. Like, we know it's already very helpful for people who are already mid to senior career. It's very helpful, but early career, it's a disaster to replace early career people with AI because then who's gonna learn how, who's gonna get to mid to senior career? - Yeah, you're externalizing memory, you're externalizing experience into this digital thing. - Yeah. - Yeah, absolutely. You know, you touched on something right there, the Gifted and Talented program. I know that in your latest book, you talk about that a little bit as well. I think SOAR, the program that you were in. - Students on active research, which is the creepiest. - Oh yeah. - My name. - Yeah, students on active research. The SOAR sounds so lovely, you know. And you, the title was SOAR gate, which I thought was interesting, right? - Yeah, well gate, because it's like, - Play on Stargate. - Yeah, exactly, yeah. - And then gate the program. - And gate the program, yeah. - So could you, could you fill us in a little bit? I mean, I just, you know, I encourage anybody to go check out all the books that you've done, but could you maybe fill us in a little bit about what that was like coming up for you? You know, obviously thinking it's a little bit strange, the tests that they're doing, the cognitive tests and everything else, but also your research into it afterwards as an adult, you know, came up a little strange as well and maybe walk us through that. - Sure. I started writing the book. I didn't know I was writing a book. And I'm like, I guess I'm writing something. And I realized, you know, maybe about halfway through the first part of the book, that it was about disclosing in yourself. And it was almost like a spiritual process, but also like a physical process, but also a social process. And by the time I got done with that part of the book, which I thought was the end of the book, I realized that that process had worked on me and that I had to write about my own internal disclosure of this thing. And, you know, you can hear me swallow and stuff because it's hard still, and I've talked about it several times, not publicly, but nonetheless, it's hard to sort of recognize out loud that who you are as a person was sort of shaped on purpose, not just by your parents and not just by your community, but by something that you didn't even know was had an intention to shape who you are. And that's the part that I find difficult. And so, I got interested as I was writing the book in my background in this gifted program called SOAR that I was in and officially in in seventh grade. You know, when I say officially, I mean, so like I have friends who I still know who are also in the program, and so I know that I didn't make it up, right? But I started being tested for it and getting special privileges and stuff that the other students didn't get, I think kindergarten, 'cause I have the test results, and then heavily in first grade, and then from the non-out there was just a lot of testing all the time. And for the longest time, I kind of bought into the story of, and I think this part is true, you know? I do, I come from a very educated family with super intelligent minds, that's true. And I was very creative, that's true, I'm still very creative. So like that's part of the story. That's like, okay, I could see that you might want to put me in a program where I would get more stimulation or something. The other part of the story is they were doing, testing on us, that was not about that, and that didn't seem to be for our benefit, and some of which had deliberate, as far as I can tell, deliberate memory removal in this, and this is common among people who will talk about the gifted and talented education programs, and they have different names, tag, gait, there's one called MGM, there's one called leap, there's one called search, there's one, I mean there's one called reach, and there's sore, and there's other ones too. But common among the folks who had the experience of being tested for things that didn't make sense, you know, it wasn't an IQ test, it was something else, is this sort of memory lapse thing, where even in the moment I remember not remembering. So that's the tricky thing. So there's a difference between, you know, talking to someone now, saying, "And back when I was in some of the great a million years ago, I don't remember what I did." Well, probably because you're a 57 years old, you know. But in the moment. But in the moment, so I would go to this room about once every week or every other week, and I'd meet with this counselor, and I think I know who the counselor was, but sometimes there would be this other person there, but I've no idea what we would talk about because I remember the steps going to the room. I could retrace those almost to the point where I know the colors of the bricks on the wall to my left and the colors of the lockers on my right. But then I get to the hallway that has the room. I open the door, I remember that, and then it's the first one on the right. So I remember that. It's a small room like the size of a bathroom is very small. And there's, you know, covering on the window, so no one could see in. So that's a little creepy, but whatever, maybe an counseling session makes sense. As soon as I get in the room and I close the door, I remember nothing, then I open the door, and I leave, and I'm just confused, and I go back to class, and I remember not remembering. So whatever happened in that room, yeah. So that was the deepest part of this kernel was the acknowledgement that that wasn't about, gifted and talented education. Do you remember ingesting anything? There was a pink drink that might have two memories of one memory is that I spit it out, because they told me it was fluoride, and it was chalky, and kind of viscous, and I thought this A isn't fluoride and B, you shouldn't swallow fluoride. So why would you want me to swallow this? And then the other memory is of drinking it. But I actually had a dream last night about this. and uh. So, I'm still trying to figure out what that was. So, let me just make the context a little bigger and then we'll come back to the dream. So, the context includes also just too much hearing testing. So, I've always had very sensitive hearing by too much hearing testing. I mean, it's not like I grew up next to a shooting range and they were concerned about my hearing. They were pulling me out to do these hearing tests that weren't real hearing tests. I ended up getting a PhD in psychoacoustics and communication sciences and disorders specifically in sound and understanding sound and the brain and the mind. And I know what a hearing test is. These were not that, right? This is not, we're going to raise the level of a sound. We're going to lower it. We're going to figure out where you can hear it. It was, listen to this. Just, just, how do you feel? That's not a hearing test. And whoa. Yeah. So, there was that, I do remember that. And they were administered by these folks in suits and they were always administered in pairs. So, like two students would be there, called from the same sort of cohort and they would administer these tests. They were not from the school. They would do it in the nurse's office. So, I remember that. I remember the teachers. I didn't have to go outside to recess. I should have probably gone outside to recess. But instead, I was given a chance to do computer coding when the first computers came out in the late 70s. And so, I learned how to basic and foretran and stuff like that. That couldn't have been just enrichment. But there was this feeling to it of that there was a goal. But I didn't understand what the goal was. So, I just, just did it. Because it was more entertaining. I was really bad at soccer. And all I could do is to play soccer. And so, there was that. It feels like a, there's like a chapter out of Ender's game. A little bit, like they saw me and they're like, well, so I have the copy of the test that I took in first grade where they sat across the board. I was operating at like 12.9 grade level. Which means, you know, you graduated from high school. And they never skipped a grade. Like, I found that, you know, just a few years ago. And I'm like, why did my parents ever skip me a grade? I don't think they ever saw the test. Because every year, I remember just thinking, we're gonna learn the same thing. I went to go and say. And so. This fight, I actively, I remember in third grade, I was offered to skip ahead. And I was with my, you know, we lived on. I went to school and military based my entire life. And I remember sitting there with my mom and the teacher and her explaining to my mom that I'm incredibly bored here. I was like, I'd never vocalize that. You know, so I don't know how she, you know, said that. But she was like, you know, he needs to. And I remember my mom turning to me and asking me, do you want to go ahead? And I said, no, because I feared the social consequences. Hey, just wanted to take a quick second to say, thank you so much for all the support that you've given to Area 52. Whether that's purchasing a ticket to the live shows, whether that's liking this video, commenting on another video, sharing it with your friends, buying something from our shop, which by the way, we got a sale going on 25% off all hats, if you're interested. But just a generalized thank you. This is not a sponsor. There is no sponsors for this video. But I did want to take some time to just thank you. The audience truly, truly, truly grateful for all of your support. And I won't take up any more of your time. Please enjoy the rest of the podcast. Yeah, see, so I think they did it differently with boys and girls. So there were plenty of boys that were skipped ahead in my school. And I was jealous. They'd never asked me the question. Weird. I don't know if it's because they wanted to study me for longer, which is what I suspect or what. So my, it turns out. So, so I'm starting to get this information. But what really makes me think that there's something going on. And I'll get back to the weird counseling sessions in a second. And they say, send us all of your transcripts from your entire schooling history. So I take that very literally and I go back to like, first grade, kindergarten, you know, the whole thing. Wow. And I write them a note and I say, I need my transcripts. They're like, okay, so they went back to like microfiche and then get it. And they, you know, digitize it and send it to me. And the comments area from first to eighth grade, they're all redacted. So that's what made me. So I said, sorry, I'm me. So I think I get to see these. And they're like, yeah, no, wait, this is what we have. Like we don't have the unredacted version. Luckily, my mom has at least the first grade one. So I was able to compare the unredacted with the redacted. And I saw that what was redacted are all the notes from all the teachers talking about me. And what were those notes? Just like Julie is an amazing storyteller. She's reading at a high level blah, blah, blah. I help, she helps the other students, blah, blah. You just stuff like that. How did that, why would they redact that? Because as you get older in the first through eighth, is it all the same school first through eighth grade? As you get older, there's going to be notes about we take her out for, you know, for training, basic training. She goes, you know, to the office a lot, we don't know why. She has lots of stomachaches. We don't understand why. She seems to have lots of ear infections. You know, she's now in the gifted program. So there's no record of me being in the gifted program on the transcript anymore. And a lot of unconsensual things, I suppose, like that they didn't run by your parents. Yeah. So that's my thought. Sure. So that made me think, the other thing that made me think there's something going on is the reason why I applied for this job in the federal government is I had backing up. I got a call from this organization that I had applied to. And they said, you know, you back in January or February, you sent us a resume where you think we'd like to talk with you about a particular job. And I said, oh, really interesting, that's cool. But four days before that, I had sent a FOIA request about my SOAR stuff to FOIA. I'd said, I really want to understand this program. This is the deal. Can you just send me any information you have about this and if there's any relationship with I had targeted the Air Force because I thought maybe there was a relationship with the Air Force. It's called SOAR, I don't know. And so four days later, I get this, oh, we want to recruit you, call. And so we have a conversation and I think this is interesting. And then so they say, okay, you pass this interview, you know. Next thing is the cognitive testing. We're going to do some background research on you and then you'll, you know, pass forward to the cognitive testing if that works. And so then I think it's like a couple days later, I get an email from the FOIA people saying, would you like to drop your request? Because it might be hard for us to find out this information unless you exactly know what program it was. The FOIA just doesn't act that quickly, right? No. So they're notoriously, you know, they've got a backlog of years. Correct, yeah. So then I go, I start thinking, okay, well, obviously this seems like there's some kind of a relationship. I just see what happens if I say, yes, I want to drop it. I drop it three minutes later. I wrote it down to my journal. I get a call. Oh, you've been passed to the cognitive testing for that job. Well, so you think there's a direct relationship there, direct correlation between dropping the FOIA request and getting passed to the next step. Getting passed the next step. And the next step was of course more cognitive testing, which is exactly what I'm used to. I mean, like, again, and again, it's not a coincidence. No, and well, I don't know. Could be a coincidence. Yeah. It just was a very interesting coincidence. Sure. So I started getting like, okay, maybe there's something going on and that's when I started working on the book. So, or that's when I then that seed was planted. But I also called my mom because I was like, I wonder what she remembers. And I just said, you know, mom, what do you think about that SOAR program I was in? Done. That was the question. Yeah. She goes, well, they were studying you. And I'm like, did they tell you that? She goes, no, but they had to have been. She's like, you guys were smart and you and your sister. And I'm confident they were studying you. And I said, what are they studying? I said, who's they? And she just goes, see, I, and I'm like, do you know that? And she's like, no, but like, that seems like the right people right. And I'm like, so everyone thinks it's the CIA when it's sort of doing something nefarious. But maybe it is. I don't know. So back to going to that room, this experience, I finally decided I would do some regression with some memory regression. I went to a UAP friend in the field, you know, who do you know who's not going to plant ideas in my mind as I do hypnotic regression. And they went and did some research and they came back and they said, this person, this is a great person. So I contacted that person. Have I told you this story? Yeah. Now this is just so burned in my mind. I contacted that person. I set up an appointment. I'm scared, you know, and I told my husband, I want you to be with me when we're doing this. Like this is scary, you know, but that's the day before and I get a text from her and she says, I'm sorry, I have to cancel. I have emergency dental surgery. And I'm like, oh, totally get it. You know, when would you like to reschedule? I can't reschedule anytime you'd like to do a regression. I will have emergency medical emergency dental surgery. What the fuck? Yo, that's crazy. I know. And I was like, I looked at the phone and I was like, showed my husband. I'm like, what is this mean? And it's like, he's like, um, either she was protecting me because she could sense something or she's being told or she was being told. I mean, if you want to be really paranoid and decide that the government or whatever is that efficient, that that she would be told, I would think it's more likely to be government contractors than the government. I don't think the government is. Of course. Yeah, government is a as a term, but not as an actual entity. Yeah. Um, so either she was being told or she sensed that it would be a bad idea. So ever since then, I haven't done it. So then I had this. Have you asked her? Have I asked her about it? You should ask her that question. No, I don't even have her contact information anymore. I don't even know who she was. It was like, it was almost like a shock to my system. It's like it. Yeah. It's like removed my capacity to function about that in that moment. Does it cause you to be more curious now or less curious? I sort of after listening to what happened to other people through regressions through regressions or even the people who remember like Jordan, Joseph. Yeah. I sort of wonder if I want to know. I sort of wonder if it would be more traumatizing to know. And that's when I land on the protective thing. Right. So that's that's her having done this before. Yeah. And and clearly non-beneficial for the the people involved. Right. And so there's so there's a part of me that says. Right. That makes sense. Yeah. Maybe it's protective to not look. But then I had this dream. But also, okay. Please, please go on. So I had this dream last night when I was I knew I would be on the show and I thought we'd probably talk about this. And I had this dream that that one of the counselors, but this time it was a man. Sometimes it would be a woman and man together, I think. And I think it was her husband. And I think it was the counselors husband who had literally been a boot camp sergeant in the army back where the sword program started, which is near the Savannah River nuclear facility. By the way, anyway, so I like near Augusta, Georgia. I had this dream that the the male counselor was in my dream. I haven't seen him in a million years. Right. Yeah. And he's wearing all black. And he's telling me he's a white guy wearing all black. And he's telling me this is it. You know, you're going to you're going to do it this time. Like, I think we've I think we've got this. And I'm kind of like on his team. And I'm like, all right. Yeah, I think I can do this. You know, like, like, like, let's do it. Like, there's some kind of challenge. And in the moment in the dream, I don't know what I don't have any history in my mind. Right. But I have some apparently have some kind of subconscious history. Like, I don't have any memory of what we're doing in the dream as that person in the dream. But I have some kind of subconscious memory or body memory. And so I go, okay, and I go up sort of in my mind, or maybe in my body, both I'm like fly essentially, I love it. To the top of this tower that looks like the Stanford bell tower. And I look around out of the holes, the little port holes at the top of the tower. And then I burst through the ceiling. Like, and then that's when I realize I'm not that's not my body, you know? Yeah. And I'm, I realized, oh, I haven't been able to do this. And now I'm able to do this. I've, I've, I've been stopping, I've been letting the ceiling stop me like it's a belief thing. And I was, it was in a frame where we were very much working together on this goal of getting me to be able to just burst through this and get away from the sort of rules of the physicality of things. And to ignore that and to assume that I can go through things. And then therefore I could. And then I look down at him and I go, oh God, this guy's kind of an asshole. Like I had this moment of I burst through and then I'm like, and he's suckered me into this by making it seem like this is the amazing challenge that I'm going to do. And I'm going to feel great and everything. But I'm not going to remember this. So it's all for him. It's all for whatever he's doing. That was my experience in the dream. Were you your younger self essentially? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And so I mean, that's wild. That is wild. It's a dream. But I often get really useful information in my dreams. But there's, I mean, the only, the only connecting point here is that you knew you were going to do the show. You knew my talk about this. And then like maybe yeah, maybe it stimulated something in your subconscious that came forward. But you know, just even dreaming about this man, who you haven't thought about in years, I mean, that is kind of substantial there. And you mentioned Jordan Joseph, which also, you know, that was kind of the goal from his conversations. And what, you know, hearing him and reading, you know, what he put out as a, as Martin there that yeah, was, was this kind of idea of like, yeah, get, get out of body. Yeah. And like build this construct or whatever for that. Um, but I feel like that's, and I know that the Monroe Institute does great things with, with help with helping people. It can be very healing. But also I feel like there's this piece where getting people to go out of their body is very unsafe for them. You feel that? I think not if it's not done well. It can be very unsafe because if you're out of your body, what can go into your body? I mean, if consciousness can be free from the body, I mean, someone else's consciousness can like, hey, you know, you're a zombie right now. Yeah. Right in there. Maybe. Yeah. Maybe, maybe. I don't know. But if like if, if, if that's a real thing, it just made me think we need to be careful. I guess I was trained in remote viewing by John Bavanco. Who, I mean, I guess I was trained in remote viewing first by John Bavanco, but I, I guess this is partly his influence because he would say the safest place for you to receive information is inside your body and remote viewing has a horrible name because it shouldn't be remote. And it shouldn't necessarily be viewing. It could be all the senses. Right. But in order to do that, you need to be inside your body. Yes. Yeah. People get that confused with remote viewing. You're not actually going anywhere. This isn't an out of body experience. Yeah. Your body's like a sensor for the information. So that, if that happened, if I was encouraged to do these, these things for the benefit of someone else, it's sort of a bummer partly because like, cool, I could have done really amazing things that I don't remember that I did. But it's also a bummer because it was for the benefit of someone else. I didn't get to integrate it, as with my own directive and effects. And then I was also apparently, according to that dream, if we're going to use dreams as data, encouraged to go out of my body. The reason I feel comfortable using dreams sometimes as data is because I know my own dreams have been highly evidential in terms of pre-cognition and so. Well, Dean Raiden has a, you know, talks about that a lot as well. Dean Raiden, or sorry, Rupert Sheldrick about dreams being pre-cognitive as well and encourages a lot of dream journaling in that way. Not all of them. And so with each dream, it's sort of like, well, maybe this is just my opinion. There could be this psychological metaphor for how it felt. But it still describes how it might have felt. Very relatable as well to the entire topic. Have you ever had at a body experience aside from that? So, oh, I see, and I don't even know if that, aside from that dream. Yeah. So I have multiple dreams like that of where I'm having an out of body experience. But I don't, never during a waking state. Not ever. We're during a waking state and almost like vehemently so. Yeah. Almost like I've got that locked down. I think that's not going to be happening. I have. You have? Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I have two years ago or two years ago. I suppose it was two years ago now. Yeah, I had involuntarily two nights in a row woke up hovering over my body like woke up. I was wide awake. Were you at Monroe? Nope. I was at home. I'd never heard about this stuff before. Oh, this is before you heard about any of that. Yeah. So maybe like, can you tell me more about it? Like what state you were in? I was in deep sleep and then had a nightmare and then forced my eyes open in the nightmare to wake up because I was conscious that it was a nightmare. Yeah. And I had to wake up. So I like forced my eyes open and then I was in my room. Yeah. But everything was like, I could see in the dark because I guess my eyes were used to it. So everything was like out of focus. Like it felt grainy. Yeah. Low saturation. And felt this buzz, this incredible like deep like hum. Like I was a tuning fork and someone just slapped me like it was like like this. And I was like, it was almost you for it. Like a nice feeling. And I just felt like I could will myself up. I don't even know why I felt that, but I just felt like I could just because I've flown in dreams before. And I felt like this is the same feeling. I could just will myself up and I did that scared me. And I started paddling down back to my bed. And then sort of woke up. again, I guess, and said, you know, that was strange. It objectively didn't feel like a lucid dream. Like I woke up from a lucid dream into that, whatever that state was. And then I said, I wanted to happen again. And I'd taken melatonin that night, which I don't usually take. And the next night, I was like, I wanted to happen again, and it did. And this time, I was like, I'm not going to be afraid. And I remember willing myself up, and this time turning around and seeing myself laying there. And the fear like, oh, it was, I was scared the second I was in that state. It's like you're, I always say it's like, like you're walking a tightrope of fear. Like instant manifestation will happen. It feels like what I felt like. And it was like, if I think about something terrible, like that will come upon me. And or good. So I just didn't want to think of anything. I'm like, just keep one foot in front of the other type deal. And that happened. And uh, and then I remember swimming back to my body going lower than my body, feeling my body as I falling through it. Was your back facing your stomach? Or did you have to turn around to see? I had to turn around to see. And then I just kind of like went like this. I went, oh no. And then I, I was going like this, paddling backwards to come back down. And then I went past my body. And I remember feeling like the, like my body as I'm going through it. And like, and I go past it. And I was like, no, like out of register. And I'm trying to like go back up. And I'm like, I didn't know you can go down. Like that was very frightening to me. And then so after that, I, I remembered a conversation I had with Joe Monagal, Joseph Monagal, um, during the time that he was at Stargate, that they had sent him, you know, on weekend retreats to the Monroe Institute to see if he can leave his body and to see if that would be more conducive for a more accurate remote viewing session. And so he would do this over the weekends, right? From Fort Mead and go there and, and uh, I remember him telling me about this. And this is before I, you know, had an experience. And I, I thought, what, like, what is this guy talking about? Like he's, how can you leave your body? Yeah, it's crazy. Yeah, yeah. Like I was like, okay, this is weird. Like I was, I was buying everything else until now. And I was like, this guy's, and it was a little weird. Um, maybe a dream he's having and he's misinterpreting a dream or something, right? And so then I, when I had this experience, immediately I go, that's what Joe was talking about. Oh, if you want to turn it down to you, I think you're here. Does this make it better or worse? Oh, that's better. No. I really want to hear your words, but then I was better intense. So, um, so then I was like, that's what he was talking about. That's the out of body state. And I was, oh my god. So I start, I buy Robert Monroe's book. I read that, read through a few of his books, go online. Everybody's having the same symptoms as I had. And I was like, this is objectively not a dream now. I, I know this because I didn't know anything about this. It wasn't like it was my subconscious being like, Hey, you know, this is, I didn't know what a know to body was. And I had the same experience. These people were describing. And so that's where I signed up for the Monroe Institute. I documented my gateway process. I made a little documentary about that. And then every day when I came back from that every day for like three and a half months, I meditated for an hour every morning at around four or 30, like it was super early in the morning. And then after about three months, I started having regular out of body experiences. And did you want that? I was trying to actively have it. Okay. Um, because I was like, I wanted, do you want to deface this fear? And yeah, well, I just want to know if this was a thing, you know, because I had it happen to me. And then it started happening, um, where I would go into vivid dreams or, or, or, uh, lucid dreaming. And I would roll out of the lucid dream out of my body. But again, it's like happening in this nebulous sort of time at night where I'm like, Am I asleep? Is this a dream? Until one morning, a five through the morning, sun's blaring, my room, I have no curtains in my room, and I meditate for an hour. And I put the headphones down. And as soon as my head hit the pillow, I felt the thrumming of the vibration. I was like, Oh, it's happening. Oh my God. And I just get up out of my body. And I was lucid the entire time. I didn't fall asleep for a second. Wow. And I get up and I walk around my room. And then I hear a female voice, um, which scared me. And so I looked and I go right back into my body. But that's short 30 seconds happened during a lucid awake state with the sun shining in my room. And I didn't fall asleep. So right. And that was the last time I was like, all right. Got my confirmation. How long ago was that? It was, uh, it happened. I guess maybe not last year of the year before. Yeah. Two years ago. Do you think, okay. I don't know why I asked that. But do you think that, um, you just wanted confirmation? Or do you think you were practicing something? There's a part of me that thinks you, I mean, you seem very familiar to me when there's a part of me that thinks you were probably in one of those programs kind of like I was, especially because your dad was in the military. Um, I don't know. I don't have any memory of that. I remember mouthwash. Like that was a regular thing. Like the, the pink liquid with the mouthwash. But would you spit it out? You would spit it out. Yeah. That's Florida. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, exactly. It wasn't viscous. It wasn't opaque. Um, other than that, I, it's hard to, it's hard to remember. I don't remember anything strange in, in my childhood. But, again, I did, you know, I did like 10 schools when I was a kid. So I walked around quite a bit. Yeah. And my dad was, uh, enlisted. He wasn't like an officer. So it wasn't like, we were like air force or anything. He was infantry. Um, so yeah, don't remember anything like that. Um, yeah, and, and yeah, adversity because you were so good. I mean, it just, it just happens spontaneously. It happens spontaneously. I think it was kind of a perfect storm when it happened. But then when I tried it, it took like three months and multiple people I've talked to at a convention, same convention, I met you at, uh, we were, I was with like three other people and we were having this discussion. And I told my story and all three of the other people said, for them, it also happened at about three, three and a half months into meditating every day. Yeah. So it seemed to be like the common denominator between us for where it's like, Oh, okay, it takes, I guess, that much time to achieve like this Kundalini or this like experience. Yeah. Um, so it was really enlightening. Yeah. And for me, I don't seek it anymore. Not because I'm afraid of it. Um, but there was, there was this sentiment of, okay, this seems to be like what happens to you when you die. Yeah. This seems to be the phenomenon that people describe when they, which is why I think it might be a little dangerous. Perhaps. But I also felt like, okay, if this is what happens to you when you die and this might not be the afterlife, it might just be transitional, maybe something else. What's the hurry? Yeah. Right. Exactly. Like people have the hardest time just staying in their bodies. Yeah. And I was like, I got it. Yeah. But I'm like, now it's time to be in here. Yeah. That's why I'm here. Yeah. That's coming. Yeah. Exactly. I guarantee you I'm going, I'm going to have an out of body again. I think that's really healthy. But I also think Joe didn't feel like going out of body helped him very much. What's your, what's your memory of that? He did say that he, he had one session. I spoke to Ed May, but this is well, Dr. Ed May. And he said he had one session where there was a, you know, get out of your body, go into the other, they started with the, with the ping pong balls and either Gansfield sort of affect to like stimulate this out of body state. And then they said, get out of your body, walk into the other room in the envelope. There's a picture, go look at the picture and tell me what's on the picture. Right. And he did that, but he couldn't, he couldn't physically interact with the envelope because he was out of his body. Yeah. And so he just tried to like project where he would be where that photo was taken. Yeah. And he drew and it was like a one for one. Yeah. But he was able to do that anyway without going out of body. So it's a little tricky. Yeah. He was really good at it. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But anyways, I digress. I didn't want to make this about it. Oh, but it is. I mean, this, and I think part of it is my, like the reason I had that dream was that it brings this up is that there is this fear of, you know, there's this idea of sovereignty. That's one of the things we were talking about at that conference. Yeah. Contact in the desert in this panel. And there's this idea of like, well, even if there are an NHI, if there's aliens, how can we be sovereign over our own minds? And I think that there's both a desire in the ego to be sovereign and an awareness or a meta awareness in the rest of ourselves that holy shit, that's not a real thing. Like, where does your, where, where do your ideas come from anyway? They don't, they don't come from your ego. Yeah. Your ego is just a clamor that claims, like, look, what I did. Yeah. That's all that's. And nothing is invented. No. Yeah. Everything's discovered. Yeah. Yeah. Even inside yourself. And so the idea of sovereignty, like, there's a little concern in this ontological shock that the people who are worried about ontological shock that will discover that, you know, aliens are doing mind control. It's like, kind of doesn't matter whether it's aliens or your subconscious. You still don't have any control over it. Yeah. That's right. Yeah. You have the illusion of control or what semblance of control you're trying to hold on to. Yeah. And I think that that's part of why I that dream matters to me is because that's all operating in me too. I mean, I could say that intellectually like, oh, it's an illusion of control and stuff. But like, it pisses me off that perhaps people had me do things that that were really cool, kind of in a certain way. Like, feats of interesting, of interesting, important nature, but that I don't get to know about that. You're robbed of the experience in a certain sense. Yeah. What do you make of that because I'm I mean, I'm curious to hear your thoughts as well about where because you do you touch on information there for a second and in your book, you speak about this as well as like, you know, information, you know, rides on light to travel and that type of thing. But it doesn't have to, it doesn't have to, but it can, but it exists sort of, I guess omnipresently all around us and we all have access to that in space and time. And I do believe that is why I think that that's a sound assessment of, you know, I always, I always use the example of if this earth just disappeared, another one word of a peer, like stories around, you know, mythology or religion would vary, but math would essentially be the same. And so where's that? Right. It's in, it's, it's, it's, how foundational is that it must be, you know, before, space and time. Right. It's this idea of this informational substrate. If you want to think about it as, like, like a bunch of ones and zeros that don't, that aren't being manifested on a page or on a computer, they're just presence, absence, one zero presence absence and it's timeless, it's faceless, but it contains all the information in the universe from the beginning to the death of the universe. And then what we experience in terms of human experience could be what that grows up into. So this can, you know, sparkling water and these microphones and our headphones and our bodies, those are all the ones and zeros growing up into that. So the informational substrate sort of from that arises our bodies and the things that, you know, we have, and then we can see and feel and touch and taste in here. And so if that is the case, then what is the mind? Where does the mind live? Is the mind in physicality? No. You can't point to the mind. It has no mass. It doesn't behave like a physical thing. It's not in a place. It's not really in a time. You can shift your mind around all over the time. So the psychological sort of sense of time or the sense of events and time doesn't live in the physical world. That's the mind. And so that mind really lives in this information space. Mind really is almost equivalent with this information space. So should we be surprised when things happen in your mind where you have an intention or even subconsciously you have an intention that something just shows up, some miracles or like in your magic, right? Something just comes together. Should we be surprised? Probably not. Yeah, because the mind is constantly living in that impossible. It is of that. It is of that information space. It's just kind of leaking into the physical versus the opposite. The opposite. Right. Exactly. The physical, the brain is sort of this byproduct of the mind. That's how it shows up. Yeah. Us. Yes. You know, in a bug it shows up in a different way. So also should we be surprised by telepathy? Should we be surprised that people like autistic non-speakers who haven't been able to express themselves through speech start to learn to access the information directly without having to hear it from someone else? Should we be surprised by that? I think all these things are sort of going to be reframed in the next decade where we're going to start recognizing because of this error where we decided mind had to be physical. Which is nuts, but anyway, I bought into it too, so I was nuts too. But because of this error, we've become surprised by these things and say they can't be true. When in fact, it's like the essential nature of how everything is working. So I don't know how we started talking about that. I mean, I love it, whereas so I'm really interested in this because it begs so many questions, so many new questions for me like, is there a positive goal or a necessary throttling of our access to the mind or to where the mind is by our physical body? Like why is that a necessity it seems like? Throttling. Throttling. What does throttling mean in a car like this is like, okay, like dialing back to the access. I don't know. I was like one of the two when you have it. I feel embarrassed to ask. I don't know much about cars. But what does it mean? Just the dialing back of access to the substrate is clearly present. Like that. Yes. We're clearly being gate kept from having access to a certain extent. And when you say clearly, I want to provide some evidence for that. So it's not just the opinion. I can't actively use my mind to peer into the future in the past at will, what perhaps I can, but I just don't know how, but it feels like if we look throughout history, humankind has not been able to do that in a way that is repeatable or at all like measurable. So there has to be a benefit to us not being able to do that. What does that benefit? Got it. Filter theory of consciousness. Right. There's this idea that the brain actually acts as a filter and a reducing valve as the original term. Right. It's way less than the information is there because you can't handle. You can't handle the truth. Yes, exactly. So you get this picture of the truth and then we develop all sorts of theories based on this picture, which is wrong, but nonetheless helpful. So yeah, that's like Donald Hoffman type stuff, perceptual interface, cognition or perception. So what benefit is there? If you want to make individual creatures, like if, if the universe, I don't know, feels like something else. Don't want this. If, if there are going to be individual creatures that have different dispositions and solve things in different ways, which is actually very beneficial to a species, to have widely divergent minds to data collection as well. Yeah. And data collection. If you want to see each individual is like an observer who's going to send it up to the mothership, like, if you want that, then you better not know that you can just get all that information all at once in one second, right? And then all the information can be shared because why have more, more than one person. So this points to a creator to, I mean, if we're going to go down this road, I think it does because it's like, why else, it's like this idea, the sort of mystical idea of the creator wanted to know, you know, its own creation. And so the creator makes. It incarnates into it. It incarnates into all these separate beings and it wants to know its own unity. But the only way to really know its own unity is by feeling separate, truly feeling separate and not having access to the unity and then it can learn the unity. And that's much more valuable than just knowing I'm one, because then you haven't really learned it, right? So it's just, it's a really beautiful story. And it makes sense too. It's a story that makes sense, it's very compelling, you know? And then when, if you want to ask, is it real, is it correct, I can any story like that be correct. I mean, what does it even mean to be correct when you're talking about a mystical story? So it's sort of to be by default correct because it's so compelling and it helps lead people at least that helps me go towards the good, you know, it makes me feel like there's a reason and there's meaning and helps my relationship with God. So I say it's correct because what is correctness, what it, you know, it's untestable. So what is correctness when it comes to these deep mystical ideas, I think that what correctness is is that which leads you towards the good. All right. Just something that is just her or full of love. Yeah. But then you would, you know, simultaneously need the other half to even, to even experience love, right? Each other half. I mean, the, the, the, the love, not you, will know the, the part of the universe that is, that seems to be the opposite of love, you know, you would need that as well in contrast to, to even create it when you. Yeah. No. So there's conditional love that would be more like that contrasty thing and there's unconditional or divine love or universal love. You don't need, right, to be any other thing, right? Just like this giant love bubble that encases everything, including the informational substrate. And there's no downside to that. So that's, there's no shadow there. That's like, so that is truly foundational. So in, so as we're going down this rabbit hole, in this cosmology, underneath the informational substrate is the one true substance of which the universe is created, which is love. Okay. So that which connects, and so ones and zeros can only exist, duality, can only exist in a substrate of that which connects. You can only have this separation between a one and a zero if you, if you know that there's something from which they both emerge. And, and for, for you, you've seen that, that in your studies, that love is the foundational substrate underneath information, below everything, around everything, that, the glue that binds it all. So not in my studies, because that's just the, I don't know how to test that. Right. Yeah. And yet, not yet. But aesthetically, it sounds right to me. You're right. And I think there should be a physics of love to explore it. But in my studies, what I can test is the idea of, okay, if there is this foundation of love, and if people can experience unconditional love, I know it's a peak experience. It doesn't happen all the time. But if when people are experiencing unconditional love, if there's a kind of a sense I have that if you're experiencing unconditional love, you're basically accessing this foundational, you're aware that this foundational piece exists and kind of always accessing it because it's foundational to everything, right? But you're aware of that access. And when you're aware of that access, that can allow you to access this informational substrate that's growing out of the love. So imagine the lover like the roots, right? The love is like the roots. And then the little bushes are the informational substrate, right? The ones in zeros are like yellow bush green bush or whatever. And then the fruit from that is space and time and matter and energy. So the fruits that grows on those trees. So if you can access, if you could be aware of your access of that unconditional love, you're at the very base. So you have now access to the whole system. So the idea that I tested was if people are feeling unconditional love, are they better at accessing that information? Can they go into the informational substrate and predict the future, for instance, which is in there as much as the past, right? And so I tested that first by mistake by doing this other experiment. And I, but I just happened to notice that the folks who were rated themselves as feeling a higher level of unconditional love, which was part of the experiment for another reason, were also significantly better at pre-cognitive remote viewing. How significant? I forget what the p-value was, but we only had 36 people. So it was significant enough that with 36 people you saw it. Then I did it with online, that was an in-person experiment. Then I did it online with 305 people. And you could still see that difference. So in other words, people who didn't feel the high levels of unconditional love were just at chance, people who did were significantly above chance and significantly better than the people who didn't feel that love. So if you want to do pre-cognitive remote viewing, there's probably other things that can help by normal beats, maybe even need, I think need is really important. Belief is really important. Personality type is really important, your nature. But also being in a state of unconditional love seems like it could help. And maybe that's because of this access to these roots of the trees. Right. You're closer to the source. Yeah. It's like you're speaking the language of the roots of the trees. You're speaking that language when you're feeling unconditional love. And so it's like you're in. You're allowed in. That's interesting, because it does also relate to a lot of the alien encounters stuff. I mean, we talk whether it's you're talking about like the sort of blonde, you know, blue eye, blajara, Nordic, you know, benevolent sort of people that Georgia Damsky spoke about and all these other people. Or whether you're talking about a lot of cases as well as even whether there are these insect mantis-looking creatures or whether it's the graze or whatever, but they always feel flooded with this sense of a familiarity, but in the sense of love and compassion, like the mean you know harm and they feel the sense of calming. And so do you think like hypothetically, like that's what they're also using to communicate is they just have access to that substrate. And for them to communicate, it's just like a natural more. That's some really, I love that interpretation. So it wasn't it wasn't Jacob. What's his name? Who was on Skywatcher? Didn't he like, uh, Jake Barber? Jake Barber. Didn't he just sob with a feeling being overwhelmed with unconditional love when he was picking up that one egg? No, it wasn't it wasn't the egg. It was the eight gone, this octagonal sort of craft that he felt when he was piloting. That it was like, yeah, this overwhelming sense of feminine energy. That's very sacred feminine. The octagon. Yeah. Yeah. Wow. Yeah. And the egg is also very thin. I mean, obviously, I've always found that to be really interesting as well that if you're dealing with some type of, and you know, not to get too much into like the Jacques Valais stuff, but like if you're dealing with some type of control system that is toying with you or that is like, you know, controlling everything. If you were this big masculine energy, shooting guns and blowing shit up in the desert at a range, you know, for these nefarious, you know, contractors or whatever, like, and you were trying to like beam something down and get, you know, your psionic assets and microwave cannons and and that. What would you get? Right. What would you get? Would you get an inert feminine egg? Yeah. That's what you get, right? Like good luck and just nothing in it. It's inert and it's super interesting. Plopped in the sand. Yeah. Yeah. I think that many times this goes back to the sovereignty thing. Many times, people I've talked to who are in that community, the shooting things in the desert community, are really good guys. They're scared of not being in control. And so the response to Jacob Barber's experience is he was being mind-controlled. Like that was that's the way they get in. It's through making you feel a lot of their controlling your mind, right? As opposed to, which could be true, but also I kind of think it's just fear of being out of control and the sacred feminine. I think that there's also your interpretation, which is if you actually are sophisticated enough culture, you're not interested in war. Like war is so primitive. It's just not interesting. You're aware that we're all interdependent. You're aware that contrast does is everywhere. You're aware that there's this informational substrate and that love underlies it in this world picture. And so you're just giving people a taste. You're just trying to give people a taste. Just like folks, like this is the key. So I do think of it as a medium. I talked about this and I wrote an article on medium called How to Avoid the Time Wars. It's about different kinds of time travel and about the possibility for time wars and the way that we have to relate to ourselves, our future selves, we assume, for instance, that there's at least an informational time travel machine where you could send information back in time. So let's assume that. So in order to relate to our future selves who are sending us messages, we don't trust ourselves right now. We wouldn't trust ourselves to send us messages. And if we got the message and it was really clear, we'd be like, well, this is bullshit, someone's trying to pull one over on me. And so the only way to really move forward and avoid those kind of time wars across time is to move in on conditional love and use it as a medium to send these messages to use those routes as a medium to send that information. And so that's like dominating principle, I had to use the word domination in this context, but in any case, primary principle in my startup, can I tell you about my startup? Yes, please. Okay, so there's different kinds of time travel, mental time travel, informational time travel, physical time travel. Right. And when I say these were such confidence, it's just because I made them up. So I'm really confident that I made them up. Okay, information, mental time travel is like pre-cognition. And it's also like memory, but we don't think of memory as time travel because it's in the normal direction, right? We're used to being able to know about the past, even though we don't really know about the past, but we used to thinking we do. But pre-cognition is like mental time travel, knowing something about the future that you can't know through other means. There's informational time travel, which is just good information sent back to you in time without using pre-cognition. So like potentially using a device, like, if we could reconfigure this soundboard to give us informational time travel, it would tell us about the sounds in the future by sliding up and down according to what would happen in the future. That would be informational time travel. And then physical time travel is what, you know, all the sci-fi stuff is about like you actually send a chicken back in time and then a person then. I do wonder a lot about once you develop informational time travel, why you would want to develop physical time travel, because with physical time travel, if your goal is to send a message back in time or to go to the future and get changed the past or change the past, it's all informational, right? You could do that if you understand the informational substrate. I don't see why you'd want to go up to the physical level. Yeah, other than tourism. Other than tourism, even that, you can just insert in someone's mind a memory of having done that. Or VR. Yeah. And that speaks to alien visitations where people just have these things potentially inserted into their mind that didn't actually physically happen. But they're insertions, because if you understand the informational substrate, you can do those insertions. Right, like downloads. Yeah. Yeah, or uploads. Yeah, sure. Yeah. So anyway, so sorry to this physical time travel, but I do think there's this problem of being able to keep your memory with you as you do physical time travel. I think that if you were able to do that, there's a memory issue there. So in any case, maybe I'm wrong. Who knows? I about 12 years ago, I got inspired. I'm a neuroscientist, right? not trained in physics. My dad's a theoretical physicist, but I kind of ignore that. I'm an empiricist. I like to do experiments and build things. And so I got inspired to do this experiment that I couldn't let go of, and I finally was able to do it. And I did it. And it showed what I suspected, which is that photons at room temperature play the same games together. It's like their friends. And let me unpack that for a second because you look blank. No, I'm waiting to see what the friends do. The friends play together who stay together. So if you turn on a flashlight and you turn it off five minutes later, those friends are the ones that were emitted from that flashlight during that period of time. And they start to behave as if the system knows it's going to be on for five minutes. So it's like for the photons, they know that they're in this group. It's called boundary conditions in physics. The boundary condition of the on and the boundary condition of the off and the future are both shaping this group's behavior. And so it's like they ignore the fact that one of those is in the future. Right. And they ignore the fact that I'm a different photon than you are. We're all just going to act like we're part of this big same group because we're in this group that at the macro level is called what happened in that five minutes. Right. So it's like this is looking at the building blocks from the informational substrate that has the on and the off time to how it ends up manifesting, which is this behavior of this group of photons in the physical world. Right. So it's already aware of the substrates intention. That's all that that's what it does. Yeah. And so you can then look at the first minute of this five minutes and know that at a relatively high accuracy rate that it's going to be on for five minutes, even if the person who's holding the flashlight doesn't know that in five minutes, they're going to turn it off. Because it behaves differently than something that's going to be turned off in two minutes. That's so interesting. Yeah. So that's my startup is we're creating technology that can then look at that first chunk of time to predict the future. Period. That's really interesting. Yeah. Photons are interesting, aren't they? Photons are super interesting. They're not really physical. Yeah. They're almost Feynman, Richard Feynman, the physicist used to call, used to think there was only one electron in the universe. Hmm. I think that that photons are kind of like that. They're like a story. And you pull them out when you need them. Like when an electron needs to pull them through space time. Yeah, you pull. Yeah. They show up. You pluck them. You pluck them when you need them. Like to balance a chemical equation. Yeah. Wow. So I think they're very related to mind. Like I think they're in that one zero space, almost more than the physical space. And I think maybe that's true of all both sonic particles. Photons are both sonic particles, which are which are very, I'm sorry, I'm getting really nerdy. We can go. Yeah, absolutely. So there's Fermion learning so much right now. Okay. Enrico Fermi. So there's Fermion particles that behave like electrons, neutrons, protons for the most part are Fermion. They're behaving like almost like things that we expect are physical. You can't have two of them in the same place at the same time. That's ridiculous. Both sonic particles are like, ha, ha, ha, we're very different. They they like the Higgs boson. It's a Bosonic particle, for instance, so more photons. They can stay in the same place at the same time that you can get an infinite number of them in the same place at the same time. Not a problem. Also, their identity does not depend on the location or the time in which they exist. So a photon that's coming here from your light above us, at least probably a million of them are exactly the same photons that occurred back in 1723 when you know some historical thing was happening that I would know if I was a historian. So they're playing a different game. They're not playing this like march through time in a linear way game at all. So why not use that? Interesting to think as well that even through, you know, religious texts, they were, you know, if you even if you look at like some of the Renaissance paintings of God or Jesus or the angels, the light is always emanating from the source. God or like, you know, it's always the light. You always have to look at where the light is and the absence of light will also detect like the the people who are not in light and the people who are, you know, trying to persecute Christ or whatever. Like this is like in these paintings, there's this really vivid, interesting history of light acting as like the, you know, as God. And so to also have that be the case in physics, you know, after is really interesting to be like, no, you guys were on to something with those paintings. Yeah. No, we're always coming. You know that you know, this idea of the Civilian hypothesis where there's been another, like completely, it's like from Star Trek. It was another completely technological civilization that got as ramped up as we did and then destroyed themselves, maybe through global warming, who knows, right? Through something, through something. And we can't find the remnants because actually it's really hard to find remnants of of civilization because nature just doesn't weigh with them really quickly. So one thing I keep thinking about is the story that we have is like it's just been progress and progress and progress. But and when we think of like native indigenous communities, we often think of them as like, well, we, you know, we've progressed past that level. Like that's more primitive. But I keep thinking, what if this Civilian hypothesis is true? There is this civilization, you know, millions of years ago that died out. We have no record of them. And but what we do have is a record of those insights of the mystical insights that came from the degradation. In other words, maybe a few people survived. And maybe those people are the indigenous people who carry some of these mystical insights and then have turned those into these world religions. Maybe we that is the future instead of the past. And that is what progress looks like when we begin to understand, of course, science comes up with the same thing because it came from science. Millions of years ago, technological society that discovered this, got to this level, something happened. And it starts to grow up again. Right. It's like, it's the truth, emerging a tad and an infinite number of ways. Yeah. Yeah. No, that does seem to be the case. And also even just a natural swing of the pendulum as well, like where, you know, we were once entangled with spirituality or what have you religion and science was all sort of one. And then after, you know, the age of enlightenment, we kind of started separating from that and the pendulum now, you know, swung as far as it could on this side where we're like, Hey, we're away from all that religious nonsense. And it's all science now. And well, we're discovering we can't build a microscope that looks, you know, if we keep finding smaller things, like it's just never ends. Right. And so now we have to ask, like, Oh, is this the microscope? Right. This like the instrument that we are now we're coming back to that swing. That same mystical stance. If you, if you were to send, this is a question I've wanted to ask and that I do ask people who know a little bit about the stuff, but like, do you think it would be possible if, you know, cause these, these photons or whatever, they can be entangled through time and space and there's no real limitation there. So if I were to want to send information back, could I not simply, you know, entangle some of these or use the entangled photons and sort of have them in an on/off position, suspended in this location or whatever. And then if you come to that same location in 40 years, could you not just like pull that information and communicate through time, would that not be possible? I mean, there's something called the no signaling theorem in physics that says that you can't use entanglement to send information to do what you just said. But there's a lot of challenges to that hypothesis. And part of me, when you go back to the literature on that hypothesis, part of it was motivated by the statement we don't see telepathy in nature. Therefore, you can't send non-starter. Yes. And so if you trace back those ideas, there's a lot of motivation to build up that theory or that theorem. And I always doubt when their motivation is like, well, we don't see this in nature. Well, you know what we do. There's people who have really get to that telepathy. And so how are they doing it? Well, entanglement seems like a really good explanation. Doesn't mean it is the explanation. But. And ones and zero seems like a really seems like a great way to send information as well. Well, exactly. And I don't know that you need entanglement at the physical level for that. If you're working at the mind level, that could explain it in a deeper way. So it's just that there's the world is opening up now as people are starting to recognize, just as you said. that we're coming across these discoveries by necessity because we're finding things that we can do that shouldn't work, but they work, right? - Yeah. - That's why I'm so into building stuff, is like I've had people read, especially physicists, just read in the face when I talk about just yelling at me. Do you not understand the second law of thermodynamics? And it's just, there's a feeling among some physicists that their science cops, like we're gonna tell you that there's a law can happen, no signaling thermo, this or that or the other thing. And that's not where we're at now, we're past that. We're moving towards what can we build that we didn't think we could build because the science cops said we shouldn't be able to. So I think this might be a little bit of my brushing up against my theoretical physicists, dad, who would say things like, well, you can't do that. You know, like there was ball lightning in our house and he would say, well, that's impossible. So that didn't happen. And it's like, well, it did happen. (laughing) So how did it happen? - Wow, yes, that's the dogma of scientism. - Yeah. - Of this idea of, there are certain things you just can't challenge. - Yeah. - And that's something that you've brushed up against as well with a lot of your pre-cognitive studies. I take it as well, where the, you know, the variance or what you found to be pre-cognitive happened in such a small timeframe that they feel negligible. - Yeah. - They think it's instrumental error or, you know, they just kind of brush it off because there's no way that that is allowed to be true. - Well, yeah. And when you find it on the seconds or minutes time scale or with remote viewing, pre-cognitive remote viewing, it could be days, weeks, years. - Could you, could you talk a little bit about some of these experiments for the audience that you've done in terms of looking into, you know, instances of pre-cognition and how you tested for that and what the results were? - Sure. Yeah, I've sort of gone to two scales. I've gone to the really unconscious physiological scale and doing things on the seconds, like 100 milliseconds to seconds time scale. And then on the other end, the more conscious, more deliberate, pre-cognitive remote viewing, you know, minutes, days, weeks, et cetera, scale. So I've studied both of those. I kind of like to do the extremes and then figure out what I can figure out. And so if you want to study pre-cognition in the body, physiologically, it's called pre-sentiment. Generally, it could also be called these other things. I made up other terms for it to try to get it published, like predictive anticipatory activity, so it didn't sound scary to people at work. I got a mainstream journal, but then I would regretted it because it's so much easier to talk about pre-sentiment. It means pre-feeling. So it's the idea that your body can change its heart rhythm, respiration, EEG, you name it, whatever sensor you want on the body, before an event occurs and the event is random. So your body's responding to a future event that it can't know about, according to the usual means. So that's pre-sentiment. And the way you test it is exactly the way you would think. You hook someone up to whatever monitor you're using and you have some stimuli, some that are maybe gonna make them scared or excited and some that are gonna just be neutral. And you don't know, and the person doesn't know, no one on the planet knows, which stimulus is gonna show up. But just before the stimulus shows up, there will be a amping up like your heart rate might go up or your skin conduct that's might go up, you might sweat a little bit more. If it's going to be in a rousing stimulus, that's gonna raise your attention. And it will just be neutral or maybe go down if it's just a neutral stimulus. And that's the result and it's been shown just a lot. So one of the first studies I did was bringing people in and showing them like a picture of a gun versus a picture of a sunset and then they started crying 'cause it was kind of emotional. So I stopped that experiment because the gun is scary. And I had them just decide if they, I tried to ask them to be psychic. I said, there are four doors, click on a door and have that be, we're gonna find out if you won $2 or something. I did this on a smartphone. And that was, the winning was an amazing stimulus. So if they were about to win, their bodies would get excited. This was really, really, really obvious among men. Among women, not so much. Among men, if they're about to win, they're at two dollars, it's only two dollars. But if they're about to win, there's an excitement that happens. And as all random, there's no queue as to whether they're about to win. But the body knows it. And this goes right into some of the literature on day trading. So looking at people who are really good day traders, I think there's this wonderful paper called inter-reception and surviving a London trading floor or something and it's about that the really good day traders are the ones who can hear their own heartbeats. And so it's almost like they don't even need a sensor. They're sensing into their own body's wisdom about what's about to happen. - Well. - Yeah. So that's the physiology side. And then on the other side is the pre-cognitive remote viewing side, which is draw picture, write down some words, do whatever you need to do to describe the target you're about to see, you know? And you have, in my studies, I tend to say like you have two minutes to do this because I'm working with people who aren't very good and they're gonna just do work. - Is the target already chosen? - Oh, no. - Okay, so it's a random target that will be generally? - In all cases, I should have said that. In all cases, you don't select the target until just before it's shown. So the person has to already have all the data that you're gathering. - Yeah, before the target is selected. - Absolutely, 'cause no one should know what that is. - That's right. - Yeah. So, but you might have a target pool, like we had a target pool of like 89 targets. And so they were gonna get one of them, but they didn't know what those. And, you know, we didn't either. No, which one would be selected. So they draw the picture, they do their words or whatever, they submit it, they wait whatever period of time, then they're able to see the target. Then what you do with that, in the past, what we used to do, and in most of my studies, what we used to do, is you take, how do you score it, right? 'Cause they're gonna like draw a smiley face and some trees or whatever they draw, right? And you have to figure out that, is that most like a picture of the atom bomb? Or is it most like a shoe, right? And those are very different than what they drew, 'cause these are not gifted remote viewers, these are just regular folks. So what you have to do is take them, you give them to an independent judge who doesn't know what the target was. They don't know that the atom bomb was the target. - Right. - So you give them the atom bomb and the shoe, and you give them the person's little drawing, and you say which one of these is this most like, and then they make a judgment. And that's how you do that. And so you could do statistics on their judgments, so you get two independent judges and you compare, et cetera. And then you show the results. So the results look like people can do this, not great, but like a rate above chance, you know? They can do better when they're in a state of unconditional love. So that's interesting. They can do better, especially if they're women, if they're a little bit anxious. So that just, you can learn a few things about it, but sort of my favorite thing about it is that in the more recent work, we've been able to use AI, so LLMs, to do that judging, to take away some of the human bias, and to find actually better and bigger effects that we didn't know were there. So we recently worked with a Lucid Dreamer, who is also an artist, Dave Green in the UK. He'd actually asked people, would you like me to do a portrait for you? And then he can Lucid Dream practically at will. And then he dreams the portrait. He asks in his Lucid Dream, "Oh, so here's the person, show me the portrait." And it poses over their face, the portrait. And then he goes back to sleep, and then the morning he wakes up and sketches it out. And so we thought, well, can we teach him to be a precognitive remote viewer in his Lucid dreams? And so we did that kind of experiment with him. And the human judges, it was, they could not find really much correspondence, except for one case which was really striking out of 10 dreams. And so of course, good human judges found that case. Good AI judges found that case, we tried five different models, found that same case, but also found all these other cases and correspondences. And then we could do statistics on that. So now we could use that in my work with non-speakers to look at the similarity between how they're describing things telepathically and what the target is and get statistics on that. So it's really been helpful to graduate from human judging to AI judging. And that's largely been driven by Damon Abraham on their team, who's just really involved in understanding the phenomenon at all levels. And wants to bring AI into that kind of remote viewing scoring, it's something else. Do you think in terms of academia? And I know that that's like, the bad word here. But do you think that AI is a detergent? for them to want to acknowledge this type of study or do you think it favors their interests? 'Cause, you know, you say, you know, we're eliminating bias, we're eliminating human error by getting rid of these judges and having AI. Part of it, but do you see that as being a benefit to the people who are reluctant into looking at this or they hate it more? They hate it more. - Well, I think, well, certainly you're not getting completely rid of human bias because AI has that baked in. You're almost using human bias to do the scoring. - Sure. - But you get rid of things like positional bias. - I see. - Because you can give the same AI the two images in an opposite position and it doesn't remember that it saw it in the other position. So you could get both, whereas with a human, you'd have to give two different humans. It's a lot of humans. Will it make people hate it more? I think the people who already hate this stuff will hate it and say, oh, well, they used AI. Right. And the people who don't will be like, cool, they used AI. And the depth, I mean, I think we should talk about this. The depth of the bias and where it comes from is really interesting to me, because this is what I've been trying to work with for ever. I mean, in my professional career sense, I think maybe 1996. I've been trying to work with this, just notice and try to understand what is it really that makes people think this can't be true and upsets me so much and it almost hurts me. Like, that professor's telling me it hurts them for me to feel that this is the way the universe works. It hurts their feelings 'cause they appreciate my mind and I have so much to offer blah, blah, blah. And if only I would just present the more mainstream side of my work. - Yeah, that might also reflect just where they might, I'm assuming they're older than you as well. So when you get to perhaps the later stage of your life, you're a little more reluctant into changing your foundational. And you want everything to be nice and neat before you leave this place perhaps. - Maybe. Maybe, or yeah, I think that's part of it. I mean, I'm not necessarily like that, but I also have a high capacity for uncertainty, which I think a lot of people don't have. Yeah, you do too, yeah. And so we can talk about these things in some kind of a generous way to be generous to the ideas without shutting them down. - Yes. - And without latching onto them either. - Without, yeah, and without latching onto them, because who knows, I mean, they're probably all wrong. - Yeah. - I mean, we're just have these little idiot human minds. You know, I want to could be like this. You know, it's just like, okay, maybe we can do experiments, but even the, what we perceive from the experiments could be wrong. But I keep coming down to, there's this basic fear of, well, there's sort of superficial thing about ego. Like, if I'm wrong about the way the universe works, then I guess I'm not as smart as I thought I was, and I was sort of basing my identity on being smart. So there's ego. But I think it's more basic than that. And I think it speaks to this fear we talked about losing control with the love feeling. I think it's sort of, I want to call it fear of being subsumed. Like, fear of, Freud talks about this, Freud was right about a couple things. And one thing I think he was right about is the fear that both many women have, this is not just a male thing, of the mother bringing her, you back into her womb, like not being separate. Like finding out that you're just not separate. - Yeah, that you're a pinched node and not a detached. - Yes. - Yeah. - And then what is the implication of that is like-- - There's no individuality. - Yeah, is like, I don't matter. But that's not really the implication. - That's the ego's belief to implication. - Yeah, that's the ego's belief, like, oh, that I will die. And it's like, no, actually, you know, if your identity is not that you have to be an invisible node, but that you're this whole ocean or this whole thing, like that's awesome. - Yeah, yeah, there's, it's a really matter of your own perception of the same thing, 'cause, you know, I guess some people would say, oh, if everything is one and we're all connected, then nothing matters. - Yeah. - You know, then we don't, then I don't matter. And where my perception would be, no, you matter as much as everything else. - Yeah. - Like, you all matter equally. - And you need to do your job and be your person, like, who you are. - But we matter as much as everything. - Yes, yes. - This matters as much as that. And we're all equal, that's amazing. - Yeah. - But some people would see that as, oh, if we're all equal, then I don't matter. And it's just a matter of perception. - Yeah, it's like, which side of the ego are you on? - Exactly, yeah. - Yeah, but it's all ego. 'Cause there's this attachment to mattering. - Yeah. - Yeah. - I guess, I guess, you know, the one thing that comforts me in this thought experiment would be, well, I mean, I find it comforting just generally, but I think the one thing that provides a little more comfort is the idea that memory, however, might be retained. You know, this seems to be the thing that we hear, is that sure the loss of individuality might be, you know, a factor here, through, throughout your life. You know, maybe you lose individuality, okay? But what if memory doesn't go away? What if memory still retained somehow? - Yes. - You know what I mean, wouldn't that be enough? I think it would. - To feel like you exist or to feel like you matter? - Yeah, or to feel like your experience is mattered. - Yeah. - Is it enough if it's retained? I don't know the answer to this. I'm so curious what you think. Is it enough if that memory is retained in the whole? - Yeah, without your individuality. Like, it's hard for us to separate individual memory from our individuality, but I think memory perhaps exists in this infinite substrate, right? Where individuality certainly does not, it's just this body or whatever it is. But the memory does seem to be information. It does seem to be. - Well, the body would though, because that's more information that grows in your body, but the import of the body is not there. But if, so this goes back to your idea of sort of, all of us are observers gathering, like different eyes gathering data, and then putting it into the informational substrate, but funnily enough, it arrived from the informational substrate in the first place. So it's extremely circular, but also awesome. So it's almost like we're building a hologram where we have different views of this information and making it more real. It's this idea of co-creation and coming alive. What are we missing from that? I feel like we're missing as we play with this idea. - I mean, we're only talking about the information here. We're not talking about what you were saying prior to this substrate of love sort of existing around the information. - We're just talking about the information being passed on. And so there is the glue, I suppose. - Well, so this reminds me of that picture you have on your wall of-- - The ball bizarre. - The ball bizarre, like the heart-shaped field around-- - The UFO. - Yeah, and so it's like, yeah. If that's basically like the nest. - Yeah. - Yeah. Yeah, that's what we're missing. Almost the nest from which this grows, right? - Yeah. - Yeah, like feeding it. Even like a, like a torus. - Yeah. - More, less like a harp. But more like a torus where it just keeps coming in. - How high do you think people think we are? (laughing) - I mean, they might be getting high at this very moment just by listening to us. - 'Cause we're actually not high, but I mean, I'm not like-- - No, yeah. - Looking at your eyes, they're not that dilated. I think you're not high either. - No, that's not. - And I hope that this conversation is followable. I think there's, I think there's-- - Parts of it might not be as much, but it's fun. - Yeah, I guess you could always wonder. I think that there's something that I'm wanting to say, which is that there's, that it really matters to me anyway. And I think it matters to you that different people, part of the purpose of podcasting is to bring, is to bring these different people who have such different views together. It's almost like you're creating that hologram. - Yeah. - That's almost like-- - Or at least mapping it out. - Yeah. - Yeah. - Yeah, and I think it's, it's a really important metaphor for us as we're moving into the new media. We often use media as a metaphor for the mind. The mind works like the radio, we used to say, "Oh, the mind works like a computer." I'm wondering if the mind works like a podcast. That's an even better metaphor. And we're moving into that. - About that, that's an interesting thought that I had as well where I've always thought the body as being some type of processing machine, right? Like some processor. Like if information exists non-locally and sort of omnipresently, and then we somehow filter, suck, whole or whatever pluck information out of the substrate and then apply it to this physical reality, right? This is the processor. What is the processor once the body goes away? Because information still exists and we hear stories of people having or at least, you know, through near-death experiences or throughout a body experiences, we hear about them being aware that I'm still here, but my body's there, but I'm here, well, then you're processing something. Where's the processor? So we talk about the body as the processor. It's a processor and a sensor of physical reality. The mind is a processor of the information it's receiving, right, from physical reality, but also of non-physical reality, in other words, like this information. So the mind is the processor. The mind is the processor and it doesn't go away when the body dies, it's the idea. Right. And so now it's able to process more directly because it doesn't have that filter and have access to the information to substrate more directly. So the mind is separate from the information then? So no. I think the information is the mind, like this informational substrate, so we're moving between individual mind and mind with a capital M or individual consciousness and consciousness with a capital C. So the informational substrate itself, you could call it the mind of the universe because it has all the information from the birth to the death of the universe in this worldview that we're making up. Okay. So that would be like the universal mind. The individual mind, this individual consciousness of which we are aware, is the filtered down access to both that and indirectly through physicality. Right. Physicality is born, if this cup, if everything that our bodies are born out of this mind, this universal mind, then our little C consciousness is this separate sort of thing that gives us this theater of separation, this illusion of separation based on physical reality and whatever filters in, whatever leaks in from the informational substrate. So. And that ceases when the body goes away? That individual mind, I think ceases when the body goes away. Well, although the big mind, the universal mind would have awareness of, oh, that body is dead. But someone could see a ghost or someone, you know what I mean? Like that, that person did exist in physical form. Yeah. So used to thinking of, this is, I was thinking about this. I was at in this hot tub today, and I was looking at the rain come down on the, on the water. And I was just noticing we're so used to assuming that the universe is random and that there's no meaning, for instance, to the pattern of the drops on the water, that we're not going to look for a message in the pattern of the drops on the water. Like that would be silly and kind of crazy. Right now, in the way, science has thought about it. But so when we talk about the ones and zeros, it's easy for people because it's, it feels like it has no intention and has no, there's no mind there. It's just ones and zeros. But it kind of feels to me like, intention is that love seeping through, like that love is an active force that seeps through and then that intention is real. It's like the intention of a creator or something. And it could affect the ones and zeros. Well, yeah. And it circles back. We can affect the ones and zeros with our minds. So it's this, this co-creator process. Yeah, ones and zeros might just be like a modern divination tool that, you know, we wanted to put it up on. Yeah, it might have been, might have been old bird bones back in the day, but now it's more sophisticated or whatever, or less, or just the same. You know, you were talking about the, the experimentation for the pre-cognition. Was that because I know I, there's Darryl Bamm as well, Dr. Darryl Bamm who, yeah, he did a bunch of pre-cognition studies. He, he did a bunch of them. And what I can say about those is the real upshot at a meta-analysis that came after him is that the ones that were more replicable were the ones that were unconscious. So they were the ones that were like fast, unconscious, not trying to do things, the slower ones that took more time in between the information and when it was given in the future, they did not replicate as well. Okay. And so I think that's very telling. None of them were remote giving. No. And there's been a lot of takedowns of his work and that's okay. Like I think there were some errors in there. And I think it's okay to criticize work and try to do better. What I notice is that the pre-cognitive remote viewing effects which are big and I think, I think I did pretty good statistics on those. People just don't talk, they refer not to talk about them. And, and it's hard to find them in Google Scholar. They're sort of buried somehow. And so I feel like if you can't take it down, it can get buried. And that's where we're living right now. So I just like to talk about them because they're there. Of course. They're real. And we know, we know Ed, Ed may, Dr. Ed may as you call him, talks about this all the time. We know that there's a big effect size, especially for gifted remote viewers. Yes. Yeah. And Sinisthesia as well seems to be a factor that was unexpected in measuring what a good remote viewer is when they, when they did that initial 600 person sort of test to get that one percent down that one percent. Yeah. And turned out they were all synesthesia. Synesthesia. I really want to do an experiment where we look at times synesthesia because I'm a decent remote viewer and I notice that I have time. The week looks and I know the way that the year looks like right now we're in July. And I know where that is in space. And it has since I was a kid, it's always been that way. Yeah. Like a synesthesia using perception time, the calendar. Yeah. So it goes like January, February, March, April, May, June. And then you turn a corner. You start going down. So it's not like looking at a calendar and seeing like no, no, no, it then it goes to September. And then now you're going this other direction. You go to December and there's this big gap between December and January. So like the years are really clear to me because there's all this space here. Are you do you have a synesthesia in any other form or is that I do with numbers and personalities? Like each number has a personality up to about 25. What's an example? 13. I get a little gritty. Gritty and 11. And male. 11 also male, but kind. Generous. Interesting. It's very interesting. I mean, that could be, you know, has that ever served you in your life? Well, when I was born instinctively, like when you, yeah, like, or but I mean more so in perhaps like relationships or meeting someone and well, if I hear that, I hear that they're born in a certain month. Yeah. They're going to be a little bit biased. Yeah. Against or for them. Yeah. And is that a proven itself to be the case? No. No. That's just my own little crazy. That's my crazy. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. But it's, um, it does help me remember, like, I can remember my hotel room or phone number or things because it's like, well, that number. What's that doing with that number? Yeah. It's a natural mnemonic. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But I would love to find out if other precognitive remote viewers tend to be, uh, temporal synesthetes. That's the first time I've ever heard that term. Yeah. That's a really interesting, really interesting thing because synesthesia itself is interesting in terms of because it, it does seem, it, it's really easy to categorize people who are neurodivergent, uh, in today's by today's standards because, and not there's a spectrum of neurodivergency, but I mean, those on the extreme sides of the spectrum, it's very easy to be like, oh, this person's clearly autistic or whatever, you know what I mean? But like synesthesia is more subtle because it seems to really pop up. You don't have to be, um, overtly neurodivergent to have synesthesia and yet those people seem to be really in tune with, uh, this remote viewing stuff. Yeah. It's really interesting. The, the, there was a really cool synesthesia story in my post, post doc lab. I worked at Northwestern and, um, in a cognitive neuroscience in, for my post doc. And I was doing EG and I was helping out with another experiment that was looking at, um, these like body lights on the body, you know what I call them, like body lights. Okay. If you, can you, how much, how many lights do you need to detect movement? You know, they use those lights in like animation. I see. They put it on the joints. Yeah. And so how many of those need, uh, do you need to correctly figure out the movement? So that was the experiment. So I was helping out. It wasn't my experiment, but I got to be there when this one participant comes in. And she's like, all right. Yeah, I see the lights and you want me to respond about the movement, but can you turn off the music? Oh. And we're like, there's no music. And she's like, you know, no, I mean, just turn off the, can you just turn it down? You know, we're like, what are you talking about? And it turns out that she didn't know this before. But that with those lights, she gets music that particular frequency of light. Yeah. She's like, it's going, it's going, it's so cool. So yeah, I think this way of integrating information, it's almost like the filter has failed a little bit. And it's just letting more information through and your body's dealing with it in this way. And that's like Sudden Savant syndrome or that's also like these non-verbal children who are maybe that's like that. There's like a glit in the physical brain that allows you know more information to leak through. I think so. I think because I've been working with the telepathy tapes folks, I'm in their documentary because I have this amazing team working with Jeff Terrence and Maria Welch and Natalia Mann and Damon Abraham and Pauli Washburn. And we're, we're really trying to understand not just the telepathy thing, but also just what is the waking daily experience of a non speaking autistic person. And it is wild. I mean, it's very different. But I keep coming across this sort of sense that. That they're right, hemispheres are unfettered. They're, they're right hemisphere where you're doing intuition, you're doing creativity, you're doing music, you're doing emotional social connection. It's just not suppressed as in a regular normal person, whereas their left hemisphere. Clearly, there's something going on there because they can't speak. And you know, generally we think of speech in the left hemisphere. There's something going on with a different kind of wiring left hemisphere, the current hypothesis of mine that is probably other people's that is also making the right hemisphere unsuppressed. And that's kind of supported by this work by Morris Freeman of this guy at Bay Cross that I think I mentioned early on. Do you know about his work? Yeah, so he's a neurologist and he starts to have this experience that maybe some of his patients can do psychic stuff and their patients who have left frontal hemisphere lesions. And so he designs this experiment where he asks people to move an arrow on a computer screen with their minds. And he asks his patients to do it and it's he finds this directional effect where the ones with the left frontal hemisphere lesions. So just background front of the left lobe is actually suppressing the right hemisphere, the front of the right hemisphere. So if you have a lesion there, which means you maybe had a stroke there or something happened, those cells are dead. That inhibitor is no longer there. It's releasing the right frontal. So they're able to do this, you know, better than controls. In other words, statistically significantly better controls at the direction that makes sense for the left frontal. So then he repeats it in a different experiment and he uses trans cranial magnetic stimulation to suppress to to reversibly suppress the left frontal activity to release the right hemisphere. He finds the same thing. So that's very interesting. So yeah, I kind of think that's a little bit of what's going on there. Like there's a physical anomaly was a physical anomaly that's baking the right frontal lobe, unsuppressed. And so that stuff is coming through. And so that being said, then there is a way where you can induce this. Apparently, you can use reversible TMS, although that's a little bit scary to me. Sure. Yeah. I mean scary. As soon as you master the brain, it's very scary. Yeah. But like hypothetically, you could you could induce these these things. Is that something you think that they were attempting to do through like the gate program? And I knew you were going to ask that. Yeah. Right. That's obvious question. Yeah. I it's funny because I've been vehemently against doing myself any experiments about stimulation, including trans cranial direct current stimulation, which is much lighter. Yeah. It's more like a nine ball battery kind of thing. And then lately I started getting interested in it, but I haven't done it. But I were if I were I mean, they knew they were a government official who was charged with this and was a neuroscientist. I would I'd be like, well, let's try that. Yeah. I mean, it seems obvious. It does seem obvious. And that you hear about that, too, a little bit, right? Yeah. Because there is like merciful Martin Jordan goes back. Yeah. Yeah. There's there seems to be two opposing ends of this of of a way to interact with the substrate. And on one end, the end that you speak of, which is this loving intention, this calming of the mind, this like. But then on the other side, there seems to be like this opposite way of inducing similar effects through trauma. And is that because I agree. I just give a big sign. Yeah. But it does seem like both of them, it seems at least to me like both of them have valid outcomes. Although, you know, one is preferable and probably takes longer is the love one and probably takes more nurturing. Where the other one is like, we can get instant access if we just like prod and poke this person and hurt them and sort of. And you know, this is devastating. So this is this is the way people have I believe been thinking. Yes. I think we, I think you can get people to dissociate from their bodies if your goal is to get them out of their body and to go get information, assuming the consciousness can float around like that, which I think we all kind of at this point, we think that may happen. It's kind of like when people say, so it really works, you know, we know that abusing your child is bad, but it really works to make them stop their behavior. Like if you hit your child, that it's really true that they will probably stop doing the behavior that makes you hit them. Like, yes, you're treating them like a dog. They will learn like a dog like that. That is true. And it's efficient. And the long term impact of that is to often ruin people's lives. So now they're no longer efficient at anything. And the behavior that you were trying to shape is probably trying to make them what you believe to be a better person, but it's hard for them to do that. And I think the same thing goes here. It's like, yeah, so for this one moment, you got what you wanted. And if you're really trying to make someone who can help you in the future and doesn't crack up or go nuts or, you know, eat themselves alive with someone, you know, what do you call it autoimmune disease or something? You failed because it really doesn't take that long to put people into a state of unconditional love and yourself. But what happens is this trauma is passed down. The people they get to do these things have been traumatized. And so those are the people who are going to be motivated to do it. And they're going to cause the trauma and then they're going to create people who cause the drama. And so it's devastating. I really, I don't know any details about this except for what's talked about among survivors. And, but that's enough for me to say, like, we're going to have to look at a different way. I feel the same way about the polygraph. I feel like it's a tool of trauma that is passed down in the intelligence community, like a hazing tool that people don't realize is doing damage. Well, it's also being not very effective at what it's supposed to do. How so? Well, it's not effective. How is it damaging? How is it doing damage? Well, because people it's it's screening for sociopathy. So it's like, if you're really good at just saying yes, no, when people accuse you of things. So in the polygraph process, someone's using these tools, but they're also doing theater. Right. This is all public information. They're all doing theater to say, Oh, no. Well, why did you put that on your form? If you did this or you must lie to people or whatever, they're accusing you of things to try to see how you were. See, it's just like stress, an occupation at the same time. Yeah. But it doesn't, but either if someone's if someone has no problem with that. And they can lie because you kind of have to lie to get through that because you're basically saying, OK, never lie, which is not true. No one never lies, right? Yeah. So if you're able to do that without any level of stress, you're probably on the sociopathy spectrum. Right. So now you're through that subconsciously. Some part of you has been essentially tortured. And you're just going to ignore that and say, well, that's what I have to do for my work, etc. But it comes up later like a flower and you can have insider threat and you can have people who don't know why they're feeling frustrated at their employer, but they are and they're going to maybe be able to be, you know, turned in some kind of way. So to me, it's going to fester. It's going to fester. It's a wound that's going to fester. So how would you reconcile then, you know, the ability to access this substrate information through trauma with your theory of having it be accessible through love? Well, you can do both. So you've access to it through both. I think you have access to it through both because Because if you go out of your body to dissociate, then you are more aware that you are not the body and then you can have access to the informational substrate. But also, I think you could do both because the universe is compassionate. I see. So it's like the universe is aware or this informational substrate is aware in some kind of way. I think if this is God, like, is aware, then it's like I'm compassionately going to great access and many, many people who've had those dissociative experiences can access states of unconditional love because it's healing because it's where you can go. It's like, it's the difference between, it's very short leap between disassociation and self-transcendence. And self-transcendence can be this amazing feeling of like I'm helping this thing bigger than myself. I am, you know, I'm in a state of universal love and none of this matters than I'm doing this thing. Kind of like that dream I had where I'm like, yes, I can do this thing. I can, you know, go rise through the ceiling and I can, and then I look back and I go, oh, but I'm doing it for this person who's not okay. That is exactly that. And so what we need to ask ourselves is, when if you can get this from unconditional love and you can get this from inducing trauma, what is going to help us in the long run better? Sure. Yeah. Yeah. And yeah, as I listened to you, I also realized that, you know, this is happening not due to the trauma, but due to the trauma's creating dissociation from the trauma. Yes. This is this is you're dissociating from the trauma in order to have access. Right. Exactly. Not because of the healing of the trauma. And so you could cut out the trauma part and just do the healing part because everyone can feel healed with unconditional love. You can still get there. Interesting. This is very interesting stimulating conversation and all, all of which I'm, I'm looking forward to this. This is one of those things like when I went to contact the desert, I had this happen. It means while we're, even my buddy Michael Philip, he asked me towards him, we had a little interview thing and he talked to me and said, so where you, where have you landed with all of this, you know, and this is after I spent, I don't know, it's weird because in these places, you're having these existential conversations with complete strangers in the most liminal transient like hallways and and they're just, hey, what do you think about death? And you're like, blah. And then you go, okay, I gotta go get a sandwich. And then you turn here. And then someone else is like, I think aliens are this. And you're like, all right, let's go there. And you're having just a multitude of like the craziest conversations where like my hard drive felt like it was overheating. Yeah. It's like the mundane and the completely authoric. Yeah. Everything all together. And it's all of this. It's so many different paths from so many different people. And by the end of it, I literally felt like my hard drive was like, it's so, so full. Yeah. And I told Michael, and this is the same feeling I'm having right now. I said, I don't know where I stand with any of this, but I look forward to two, three days from now, like a workout at the gym, you know, where you get sore the next day and you just can't move. I look forward to two, three days once I've recovered from this conversation in a positive way to then feeling stronger in my mind and being more like I guarantee you, I'm going to have so many better questions and so many better connections to be made because of this conversation. Same. Yeah. This is really fun for me to have a thinking partner in this and the willingness to just zip around. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. Yeah. I hope we, I hope we were cogent to some extent here for the little idea. I have no idea if that's the situation. Yeah. I do want to bring up some questions from the audience because, and this is, you know, normally we get, I don't know, between 10 and 20, I think 50 people within a matter of an hour. We're asking questions and they were in multiple questions. And so I had to pick a bunch. Normally I just pick three, but I pick like maybe half a dozen because they were also interesting. So I'd like to bring a few of those up. That's great. Okay. Would you like to take a break before we do that? Yeah. Yeah. I'm looking for more, um, or tea. Yep. All right. Do you have any, um, contact experiences? No, no other than, you know, seeing some things in the sky and then that one time throughout the out of body experience, hearing a female voice. So that wasn't an actual person that was in the house. No, no, no. Oh, that wasn't clear. I didn't know. Yeah. Yeah. It was, uh, and it was an interesting voice. I've never heard it, but it was stern. It felt very stern like, uh, so I was trying to go through the window and I couldn't get my hand through the window. Like they taught me in Monroe. Yeah. And then I went to go open the window in the out of body state. Yeah. And then as I was leaping out halfway through, I hear right here, this female voice go, what are you doing? Oh, and I went, I shuttered like my, I froze. I remember tensing up like this and like, ooh, yeah. And then like looking at my body and just, I didn't want to look where that was coming from because it scared me. I, you feel like you're in a place where you don't belong instantly. You feel like I'm not supposed to be here, but you didn't before that voice. Yeah, I did. You did even before that. Oh, yeah. Yeah. You feel like you were sneaking around a little instantly as soon as you, because like when this happens, when the out of bodies, it happens, your physical bodies here. This has happened for me and some other people as well. They described this, but like this is, I'm inside my body and I'm like this. Now I'm like free floating inside my physical body where I'm like, oh, I could just like I'm, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not bound. I'm like unbound to my body and you feel that. Wow. And so that's what makes you want to just get out. I just play around because you're, because you can. Why am I just lying here if I'm not attached to my body and you just kind of like, you can just sit up. Right. And so I get out, but as soon as you're out, you realize, because there is this tone at least for me like a, like the entire time and it's very ominous, like almost dreadful like, like for me, because you feel like you're in the upside down. You feel like, oh, this is not my room. Yeah. This is a projection of my memory of my room. But you're not in your room. This is, this is a different place that you're not supposed to be here. This isn't, this isn't a dream. This isn't your room. This isn't reality. This is a different place. You're in a different place where there's, there could be other things here. And you know that instantly. Instantly, I know that I am not alone in this world. Yeah. And I don't know if they're here. I don't know what I don't want to see them. I don't want to talk to anybody. I just wanted, I wanted one foot in front of the other. And I'm literally just like moving, looking here blinders. I'm like, I don't want to look at anything else. Right. In case. And then as I go, I hear this voice, I go, all right, back in bed and yeah, instantly out. And yeah, all of that for me was really trippy because it happened during a waking state. There was wasn't one millisecond rifle seat. And I looked at the time when I put my headphones down at 6.30, I was 6.30, and it was like 6.32, like every second was accounted for. Yeah. When you came back in your body, do you feel like anything else was there? Do you feel like no, did you feel safe back in your body? Yeah. I never for once felt like that could have happened. I also feel like I don't know, but I feel like when you have an out of body experience, we call it an out of body experience. I don't know that that's what's happening. We called it that because we can see our body and see our room and wander around. But as even Robert Monroe talks about it as if I've experienced, it's not your room. Yeah. It's like an 80% it's your memory of your room. Yeah. So who says that you're out of body at all? First of all, right. You could be your your brain literally has a construction of where your body is in space and what your room looks like and you could be wandering around in there. Correct. So it could be giving you weird feelings or by locating. Yeah. Right. You know, who who says I can't be in and out of my body at the same time? Right. And also, I mean, I get that. And that's why this thing about getting theoretical information like looking at the envelope ends up being important. But it's not important because you can literally just remote view while you're having an out of body experience. It should have to do it. So it doesn't actually prove that you left your body. No, exactly. So that's where I'm like, I don't really, I don't know what I'm experiencing when they say out of body, I think it's the easiest thing to say because that's what it feels like. Well, there's certain like neurological disorders that will give you that experience. Right. Yeah. And so like, and even it reminds me of my dad's wife who has Alzheimer's. And she came home after after getting surgery to her room. And she said, this looks just like my bedroom. But I know it's not. And I just wonder how much of that, the dementia processes are similar to like losing the tether to space time or just space time or to being in your body. Yeah. Just that because the brain is being impacted in the way that constructs these things, we forget that they're all constructed. Yeah. And so it's our reminder that all this is constructed. And you need an anchor, you need some type of anchor to anchor you into that moment. And if that anchor, whether that space or time or the illusion of where you are, if that anchor isn't there, then you're just kind of like, "Oh, this feels familiar, but it's not." Yeah. Wow. Yeah, so I don't know that that's what anybody's experiencing and that's why I don't have a fear of like somebody else taking over my body because I don't fully think I'm even out of my body. Right. That makes sense. But I do feel like this is a non-physical reality that I'm currently experiencing. Yeah. I just don't know that it's separate and I don't know that I'm not in both at the same time, like perhaps part of my consciousness is projecting this, you know, simulation of a reality that I'm in now, and the other part of the consciousness is well intact in my body. Yeah. You know, I don't know. Yeah. When do you look down at your body, though? Yeah. Does it look like you're. You don't recognize yourself. Well, at least I don't because, like, when have you ever seen yourself with your eyes closed? Yeah. Right? My husband takes a picture of me. Right. Exactly. But you look different. Yeah. So you look at yourself and you say, "Is that me?" Yeah. Like, it really is. Like, it feels like, "Is that a stranger?" Like, and then you get the realization out of it to you, but you're just not familiar with. So the body doesn't look dead or. No. No. And it's not entirely in detail. Like, it's a little fuzzy, too. Like, just because of everything, I guess. Yeah. I think what I heard was the more you go out of body, the clearer it gets. Like, you upgrade to like the HD version of it. Like, if you've done it enough, so I had the very low res version for my first few experiences. I wonder who that woman was if that was like your mother or. No, it didn't sound like my mother. It didn't. No, it was a. Well, it didn't sound like anyone. No. Was it human? Yeah. Well, sounded like a human woman. Yeah. But like, stern is the only way I can put it. No, I didn't feel like. Maybe it was me. Maybe. Get back in your body when you're doing. Yeah. It was like, "What are you doing?" Like, it sounded like, "What do you think you're doing?" Like, "Is what the feeling I got was?" And I was just like, "I'm not going to even answer that." Yeah. And it was funny too. I don't even know if I mentioned this in the video, but when I went to the window, beside the window, there was a rosary. I don't have a rosary in my house, you know? That was interesting. Yeah, beside the window. And so that. But that was one of the things where I was like, "Oh, this is not my room." Or it could have been some weird spacetime journey. Yeah, exactly. Or some projection of my subconscious or something. Yeah, yeah. Well, there's these amazing ghost stories about ghosts who meet each other from different times. Oh, yeah, yeah. Yeah. Who knows? Yeah. And all of the above might be true at the same time. All very difficult to task, but super interesting. Yeah, very interesting. Okay. We got questions. Yes. We got these questions here that I will pull up. We're just going to start anywhere here. Oh, I like this one a lot. From J.K.P. Oh, cool. How important is synchronization, so maybe synchronicity in this field of research? I'm taking it in a different way, not synchronicity, but synchronization like between people or synchronization of different parts of the brain or like oscillations, you know, coherent oscillations of different parts of the brain. Are you thinking synchronization? I was, but I'm happy to have you to go that down that road as well. Yeah, so I think synchronicity is our experience of synchronization. So when we're something synchronized, whether it's our brainwaves or synchronized with each other within our minds or within our brains or within my brain and your brain or our movements are synchronized, our blinks are like when we're looking at each other right now, our blinks are getting synchronized, our respirations are getting synchronized, our movements were both nodding our heads. It's just unconscious stuff that helps us connect, right? Then I think more synchronicities happen. So I think that is, it's almost like when we were talking about the informational substrate coming up and showing us through our individuation that once again we are connected. It's like when we synchronize the synchronicities that show us that we're connected are going to come up. So I think it's important, but it also doesn't need to be bothered with, like unless you really want to study synchronization and which is amazing and there's wonderful people who do that, it's just going to happen. Right. And so yeah, so I just sort of like go straight to the next step. But everyone has their point at which they're most interested in looking. Do you feel more synchronicity in a certain area of your work or a certain area of your life? Do you feel like synchronicity or synchronization has ramped itself up apparently during certain times or adversely maybe a lack of synchronization when things weren't going well, is that ever? Yes. Yes. Yes. I mean, when I wanted to talk about when anyone talks about being in the flow and in my own personal experience of being in the flow, it's this, it's a synchronicity between myself and myself. So everything has integrity in the moment. It's a synchronization between myself and someone else, I'm working with the team members. I'm really interested in how teams work well. And synchronizing between teams doesn't mean everyone's doing marching at the same time, not not that at all. It's more like the person who's really gifted at X. So like in your podcast team, the person who's really gifted at video editing and the person who's really gifted at dealing with the guest and the person who's really gifted at figuring out what is going to be a stupid topic and a great topic. Synchronicization there, obviously you can't do the same thing, your tasks are different. But there's a feeling of right action at the right time that occurs on what a team is buzzing along. And so yeah, in that case, synchronicity would, or synchronization would be more frequent when things are going well, obviously. Yeah. And then synchronicities would occur and synchronicities here to fight in the Jungian sense of things that seem to appear completely disconnected, but end up having great meaning when put together. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Coincidence with a lot of meaning. Yeah, because I often, I have certain synchronicity engines in my life that I purposely insert. Like what? So I have one, which is just an app and it's an app that sends me a new word every hour that I want to learn. It's just random words, but the words are like words that you normally wouldn't use in conversation that are quite, you know, maybe complex or maybe very specific words. What's the most recent word? I can check right now. And we'll find out if there's a synchronous bombastic, excessively confident and pompous. Oh, am I like that? No, I wouldn't say so at all. But these are the type of things that I'll get on the hour and not always, but I'll get a notification. I don't have very many notifications, but that one's on. And so sometimes in the throws of a conversation, I'll get a notification, I'll just glance at my phone to see what the word is. Yeah. It'll be very synchronous to what we're talking about. And I've learned that if I follow up on that in terms of my attitude or my decision-making, at least personally, that it, it always favors like a more, I guess, I favor whimsy in my life generally. And so when something whimsical like a synchronicity pops up, I tend to alter my course to favor the synchronicity. Yeah. I say that. It's not an absolute putter. So I have a built-in thing like that. I made it for other people too. I do this biblio-matsy thing. Oh, yeah. Yeah. But then I made, I took my book and I asked my friend Polly Washburn to make code for my website where it could turn my book into an oracle. So you put in your question, it ignores the question completely and just randomly chooses a number of sentences for the book and strings them together. And it's so ridiculously, for me, sometimes insightful and I don't know if that's because I wrote the book and these are my words coming back to me, but it's just shocking. But then other people are trying it and anyway, that's why I have that book wall that you saw over there. Yes. Biblio-matsy. So I, when filming b-roll for an episode or whatever, like we've been playing around with like just filming and like you'll come across the word you were looking for. Yeah. That's fantastic. Oh, yeah. So to me, that's just a demonstration of this informational substrates saying, you know, either free sample. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Yeah. And I also have found that if I stop seeing synchronization, it's a subtle signal for me to maybe change course as well. Yeah. So if I stop seeing it, like if I'm everything synchronous and all of a sudden things aren't synchronizing. Like what's happening? Can we get back to that? Yeah, exactly. I'm looking at my clock and it's 11/12. Yeah. That's a minute off there. Yeah. Something's off. And I'll just, I'll take it lightly. I won't make, you know, great life decisions based on these things. But suddenly, I will perhaps, you know, steer the course a little bit and until it picks up again. Yeah. I'll just say, might also be psychosis, but I tend to favor whimsy. Yeah. whimsy and psychosis. I think the problem is that they seem similar, but psychosis is really a negative experience. Absolutely. Yeah. whimsy is a positive experience. - Yes. - All right, let's go here. Great question, JKP. Thank you. you. This is a doozy. I love this thing. It is great, right? It's like the universe revealing itself. It is so cool. This is from test. Great question. What is your functional understanding of the fourth dimension? This might be where we use the pad if you need it, but yeah. Well, the fourth dimension in physics is just supposed to be time. It doesn't behave like the other dimensions if you're some physicists, because you're not only supposed to be able to go in one direction. If you're other physicists, you don't care about that, and it's time reversal, because reversible, because most physics equations are time reversible. So it's just orthogonal, which means it's not on the same going in the same direction as the other three dimensions of space. So that's sort of the classical fourth dimension. I bet your, oh, I bet you're also asking, does the fourth dimension in fold the three dimensions of space? In other words, is the reason why, I don't know why I think you're asking. This is just a psychic head test. I'm sorry if it's wrong, but we don't know why it should seem like you could only go in one direction. The fourth, it just behaves very differently from the other dimensions of space. You know, I can go to the left or the right. I can go up or down. But then there's this one dimension that's like you can't go in this one direction, but you can go in the other and it kind of like only at certain times and only at a certain speed, it just seems kind of wonky. Like it's not a real dimension or it doesn't behave in the same way. So one explanation is that if you're a spatialist, you might think time is really just some kind of folded spatial dimension, but I'm kind of a temporal person. So I think the whole thing came up from time and it's not the fourth dimension at all. And what created these dimensions is time. And so like time is one of these foundational pieces. Time is what created the physical reality? Well, informational substrate created the physical reality. But the physical reality, the physical reality includes space time and includes matter and energy, right? And so informational substrate, it's almost like there's layers and space of space time time is the first created and then created space. So the fourth dimension would be perhaps the absence of time? Well, that's cool. Sure. I was thinking the fourth dimension would be like information, which is also not beholden. Yes, which plays by different rules. Yeah. Yeah. And and then maybe a fifth dimension would be time. It depends on how you want to think about what dimensions mean. So really, I think the question is how did dimensions work? And I think there's like the string theory people really think differently than the standard physics people. The way I think of it is dimensions are only useful to think about with space because literally dimension is about space. And so when you start talking about dimensions that aren't space like information or time, I think it's better to talk about them as geometry. Like this is really like a geometry because it has these particular rules or these particular angles. So I guess the answer to real answer to your question is my functional understanding of the fourth dimension is not very good. Fair enough. All right, we got a question here from slug. Excellent. Yeah. I saw a slug today. That is his real name. You know this? No, it's just an actual slug asking question. If you had a hundred million dollars tomorrow, which venture gets it and why? A slug. Interesting existential question from a slug. I would take that hundred million and put it into my own company to actually my two companies. So American electrodynamics my startup that is trying to make this informational essentially time machine. And then half of it and then the other half into my nonprofit applied love labs, which is trying to build technology to help people experience unconditional love and use that to get beyond beyond our limitations and move towards human potential. I'm very interested in this. What's what's the the proposed technology that allows that to happen? Unconditional love or time trial? Unconditional love. Yeah, obviously the time trial one that's easy. Yeah, we've gotten past that already. I think we solved that during this podcast. Unconditional love. Yeah, so we started at like in 2019, I started this nonprofit because I was having this experience of remembering what it was like for me as a kid in this really rough household where I had these very loving parents. Unconditional love was present. I could feel it almost like a force, but there was so much dysfunction. There was abuse. There's neglect and mental illness going on. And that my father had a possessive compulsive disorder. And I'm not going to go into two depth for anyone who might have been traumatized in this particular way, but he would every night he would do this particular. He would act out of ritual on myself and my sister. That didn't on the face of it seems sexual, but it did sort of seem sexual. And that was hard because I was helpless and I really worked on not dissociating. And one of the things I remember experiencing was that there was a rocking chair near my bed. It wasn't even a real rocking chair, but in my mind's eye, it was a real rocking chair. And there was this woman in her like 40s or 50s with dark hair who was telling me it's okay to be angry. He doesn't know what he's doing. He's not in his right mind. But it's fine to be angry. And someday you're going to thrive. And you're actually going to be like more than okay. And it was a really loving thing. And I realized later when I was in my 40s and went through therapy that my 30s and 40s went through therapy. And my therapist had me do like a little time travel narrative, we call it in the therapy world. And had me go back and hold my hand and talk to myself. I realized that that was me in the chair. And at that point, then I couldn't remember if I actually did for real have this experience as a child or if it was fabricated from the therapy and I didn't care because I was incredibly healing this experience of connecting across time with myself. And I was like, I'm connecting with love across time. I want to create an organization that's going to help people do this because I know it's powerful and I want to scale it. So I got a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which is a big health foundation to create a technology that would help people do this and to measure whether it was helpful. And we did, we call it time machine, you can go to it at timemachine.love, it's very simple. It's something that you could code up now in like a day on a lot. But it took a while back in the day. And we showed that if people worked at it for, we had them do it for 10 days, they, the people who had early childhood trauma, that was severe, improved to the point of people who didn't have early childhood trauma in terms of their overall well-being. So they really benefited. They've everyone improved, but the people who were much worse off at the beginning just did a lot better. So it really worked. So then I'm like, all right, what other technologies can we build to help people like get in love with themselves to bring this bubble of love around themselves and others, you know? Because this is healing. Like this is actually in my world view, what everyone from the biggest billionaires to the person on the street who's trying to get their next, you know, heroin hit, everyone's looking for love. And in fact, I mentioned heroin hit advisedly. There's a really great study out about universal love showing that when people, when they had introduced people to universal love and had them do these universal love meditations who were opioid addicts, they were less likely to reuse. I mean, there's something about love is a healing, a real healing tool. So scaling that. So what other technologies can we use? So we created a technology where you just look at someone's eyes without any, with an unconditional love meditation, but you can't speak to them. It's a stranger you've never met before. We want to give it to like Israelis and gozans. We want to give it to red states and blue states. I mean, it's just, it's a way of just not knowing who that person is and learning how to wrap both of you in this loving state. So it goes on like that. There's a technology I can't talk about that we're developing with that group called the micellarium. They take ideas and they turn them into technologies that can help people. It's very cool. Very cool. That sounds very interesting. And also when I was at Monroe, there was a brief talk because they'd also mentioned something along the lines of meditating on your past trauma, going back, healing yourself. One thing they would do is have you go back to this, like whether it's traumatic or whether it was just an event you would rather have of a different outcome too and live the different outcome. - Yeah. Completely like make the other decision. Yeah, so you made this decision. Okay, go back and make the other one and play it out Yeah, and you do that and and from that you would feel better. Yes, and and it it isn't you know You could you could also say that well that's delusional. We're like okay, but I feel better Yeah, this is what that's the thing who cares. It's been in the past it really matters how people feel Yeah, and so we've been in this behaviorist tradition that says that doesn't matter only things that are you know Apparent on the outside here takes a medicine. Yeah, here's takes that that we can see on the outside and it's just like no Actually, it really matters how people feel. Yeah, and so when you you do a study where people are doing self-report and People say oh, it's just self-report It's like the question is how do you feel? Yeah, people are really honest of course Yeah, I don't know if this is helping. So yes, the Israeli Defense forces were actually the ones who who I think launched this idea they called it back to the future Therapy or something and they found that it really helps PTSD to go back With all you know now because you survived the PTSD because you weren't there before it So with all you know now go back to the trauma and sit with yourself and Give yourself idea You know an idea about what to do and like let yourself know you're not alone and then do it in the opposite direction Go back and be the one who's alone and is having the traumatic experience and notice that this future person is there to help you And go take their advice. So it's just super powerful very healing. Yeah, cool. Yeah, and thanks by the way Slug for that 100 million. I will totally appreciate that one that shows up I just have this visual of this slug just going yep. You're welcome. We're good We got actually you know slugs got another question here, which is really good. We'll bring that up in a second here This is a really really good question by spicy pineapple Again, if you need a visual It's just a really spicy pineapple who's got a burning question America, China and Russia all ended their public side research in the 90s. Why do you think that is? Oh? Well, that's the quinsent There's Yeah, let me think about the right way to answer this when it comes to what I really believe I Want to be you really? What I really believe is that there was kind of and like they were all those countries are watching each other and At the time I heard a story I Think it was from Ed May but baby was from Joe about the Russians in the 90s saying Yeah, you get to America you killed all your psychics like we're good referring to pet price and maybe others and Sort of as a as a dig like what what are you is thinking? But I think that that's I think that was just a dig. I think that um I Think when you realize something's really real and And you realize how valuable it is. Mm-hmm. There's this habit because we live in the world we live in which likes to think That it's a good idea to divide things up This has happened of like circling the wagons taking your treasure and pulling it in And yeah, we're gonna hold on to this treasure and we're gonna develop it in our way and we're not gonna tell you about the way that we're developing it So we're gonna declassify What we've done because now we kind of get what's yeah really valuable at least part of what we've done well Yeah, well the class by part of what we've done But there's some really interesting we should talk about some really interesting things in that but um And then we're gonna sort of develop it in our own way because maybe we're gonna catch on to something that's very different So I think it was a recognition This is really real. It's not a game anymore. It's not just something that we could kind of Pretend about this is about this is fundamental to the nature of reality and it all happened simultaneously Yeah, it's like oh we it's just the same seems to me with UFOs. It's like I see You're now going through a disclosure process. Okay, maybe roll do disclosure. You know, it's just The funny they're all playing the the game. Yeah, the funny thing about this interdependent world is it's really the case that From a high level view these countries have to look at each other and we're all dealing with the same planet And the same people so we have to look at each other and say okay Is it really in our best interest to do this now if you're doing that? Yeah, so it makes sense to me they're hiding their psychic stuff. Let's hide our psychic stuff Yeah, maybe they're maybe and then also the other part of it is maybe I don't say this with any particular knowledge But it's just sort of a guess about human nature and also I know a little about the intelligence community from from my friend Carmen who I do this show with That does playing cello and some other people there's also a feeling of like Maybe then they want to know how stupid we are like maybe they caught on to something Right, did you see a rival the movie? Yeah, of course. I've seen it multiple times. I love that movie Yeah, so at that moment when they think oh, no, they figured out Then everyone shuts down. Yeah, and so it could also just be like we don't want them to know how stupid we are They figured something out and they could have just been bluffing. We don't want them to know that we didn't figure it out Yeah, yeah, it's a really interesting take that movie's great. By the way, there's a More last time I watched I picked up on do you remember at the end when she's getting all the visions? Yeah, I was like, oh my god You know, yeah, but there's one vision there where the child the daughter she draws because you remember she draws The canary. Yeah, the canary and the cage That's right and then they kept bringing the canary up and that's where I realized oh the child is the canary Yeah, the child is the canary. Yeah, the child had to die had to die for them to know what to do Yeah, when I realized that I didn't get that I've seen that 13 times and I didn't get that That is because they kept bringing the canary up but the canary kept surviving But she drew the picture the canary. Yeah, and and the flashbacks see the mother and the mother and the dad Yeah, you see the mother down the canary in the middle. I was like oh, she's the canary. Oh god. Yeah. Oh, yeah Such a good movie. Oh, man, and that's also good because That is how people feel We we feel with a relationship to the government. I mean or when I say government in the broads. Sure We feel like we are the canary. Yeah Yeah, definitely. Yeah, they're not the canary Okay, Guy or Guy or Guy a French person. Yes Kind of answered this, but I feel like it might be good to hone in on an answer here What does love actually change in pre-cognitive remote viewing? Okay, what does love actually change in pre-cognitive remote view? And I want to pronounce this gooey like like the interface The interface that we all see okay But is it actually change That's interesting It's interesting because so my definition of love is that which connects and then my definition of unconditional love is Feeling loved and being able to love without anything needing to change so This I'm I'm parsing this question Because I don't think that You know that that Bible phrase about love doesn't change anything like horrible with Bible things I'm not familiar, but I'm Jewish and and furthermore never read the Torah so but I think there's some phrase about like love doesn't alteration Doesn't alter stuff. That's how eloquent I can be and But I think that's real so I don't know that it changes anything But if someone is in a loving state Then there is no unconditionally loving so I want to make a distinction between conditional love which is kind of like if you're a computer scientist It's like Conditional love is like an end statement both things have to be true In order for love to happen like I have to love you you have to love me now we're in love That's what we usually think of as love unconditional love is like You could be a completely ignoring me and or hate me, but I unconditionally love Everybody like that's the other thing about a conditional love is it includes everybody, right? So it's very different and it's more of a rare thing for that reason So unconditional love doesn't change anything But what it does do is when you are in a already in a state of unconditional love I think what it actually allows you to do is not have any conditions on time or space So it's almost like a it's almost like a belief factor It's like if you could like if you could imagine the universe as a giant bubble of love Why why are you privileging or saying that you could only get information from this half of the universe But not this half of the universe or this little area that's right in front of you. It's like it's all included in the bubble Just going to a different place in the bubble So I think that it's I think if it changes anything it would change your perspective Or a belief that you're connected to something that previously you didn't know you were because you were having a condition like I can't love that right? I'm just now realizing that that's the, it's the oneness that you measure in quantum physics, but it's also that oneness you feel unconditionally through this love, right? So that's that oneness, that feeling of like, oh, we're all one and there's like, lovey-dovey, sort of thing. But that's also what scientists and physicists observe when they're looking at the quantum vacuum over the zero point. - Yes. - Like it's like, oh, this is all one. - It's all one. And that's, you know, also what love is. - Yeah, and so if you can, if it can shift your perspective because you're viscerally in that state, then any concerns you had about like, oh, I just really can't do this go away. It's like bursting through that ceiling in that dream. - Right. - It's like there is no ceiling. - Right, there's no spoon. (laughs) And, but there is a slug and he's got another question. - Okay. - And shut it to everybody who's asked a question, you know, so many questions were amazing. I could only choose so many. But the slug had multiple good questions. So we chose to, what target traits produce the strongest signal, emotion, novelty, or physical contrast? - I think this is a UC Santa Cruz person. (laughs) I wonder if I know this person. What target traits produce the strongest signal, emotion, novelty, or physical contrast? 'Cause Ed May would say contrast, right? That would be like, as soon as something has entropy or high entropy would yield like a more accurate reading of a target. - I would say none of those things. Yeah, I get what Ed May would say, but I guess I disagree. What I've found is, novelty comes the closest. - Okay. - But it would be what I've tested is interestingness. Like how interesting is the target? Psychic attention is just like non-psychic attention. - But would that be subjective? - Yeah. - Okay. - Yeah, I didn't test it subjectively. What I did was I had a bunch of the targets and had a bunch of people on an M-Turk, just these are just human Raiders rate them according to their interestingness and then I averaged the scores. - Oh, interesting. - Then I could show that the ones that were like off, that got the wrong target. It was because the opposite target that wasn't the target was actually more interesting. - And what is interesting based on? - Yeah, so what I said in the definition, this is just a human judgment call. - Sure. - What I said in the definition is, what seems most intriguing? Which of these targets seem most intriguing and then just all the different pairwise combinations? - Okay. - Right? And so you're always trying to define the term with some other term that's similar to it. So basically that's how they responded. And there was this situation and I replicated this twice where if some target is more interesting and you're more likely to get it correct and if it's a target pair, like a dummy target and a real target, if the dummy target is more interesting, you're more likely to get the original target wrong. So it's very much like waking daily perception. If something is very interesting in a memory task and you're not a trained memory athlete, you're gonna, if I say, listen to these words and remember them, church, triangle, albatross and cheese, you're more likely to remember albatross because it's the most unusual word. So the same thing just happens in psychic world. - Right. Even something a little more appealing. - Yeah. - You know, statically, even. - But it has to have some kind of meaning. Like, when I've used pictures that are just like, I don't know, AI or. - But if you have like a, if you're a big rock fanatic and you collect rocks, like to me a rock is mundane, but to you, a rock is really interesting. - And I've seen that with when I used to train remote viewing, I would see that and I run the team called a intuitive forecasting and then I stopped running the team and I gave that over the rest of the team, but I'm on the team. And the people who are like, we have a guy who's a computer scientist, he knows cyber security. So his remote viewings are very much focused on the technical aspect of whatever we're looking at. Then we have someone who's an artist and her remote viewings are really focused on the aesthetic aspects. And so whatever, in fact, one guy, I was when I was training, he was an engineer and if the target was a person, he'd be like, I got nothing, but if the target was like. - A building. - A building, he'd be like, oh, I mean, Scott, he's got this cool thing and then what's this thing over here? - Yeah, really. - So it's like, what your interest is? - There's no. - But for expertise, yeah. - Ah, that's really good. That's really interesting to think about. Wow, yeah, 'cause I always had it pegged like, oh, it's gotta be contrast. Like, it's gotta be contrast. Like in my head, I was. - That's a visual feature about many, but many, many people aren't visual remote viewings. - Right, but only because our brains are hardwired to recognize change, right? So like the Gansfield effect, if I hear or see lights or hear a certain sound, after all, I'm just not gonna hear it. You walk into a room and you'll smell something foul, but if you're in that room, you won't smell it. - But when you're doing a remote viewing, you're making your own contrast by showing up. Like all of a sudden, I was not doing a remote viewing and how I'm doing a remote viewing. To me, that's already contrast. - But like if you had a remote viewing where the target was, you know, something mutable or something, you know, changing or work. - This is the anthropic thing that I may talk about. - This where my head was at too, I was like, oh, it wouldn't make sense that my brain, like a moth to a flame would be a little more open to noticing change than it would to like a mundane bush over here, right? Also more interesting. So it's really hard to separate those. - That's right, that's where I'm realizing that. - Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. - We might be talking about one of the same thing. - Yeah, yeah, yeah. So more work needs to be done. There is a database that I've been making with, and mostly I'm just along for the ride on this with Damon Abraham and Halani Wabein, some other folks of something like a thousand images that could be really good to remote viewing targets and we write them on all these dimensions. And so I think that work can be done now. - Amazing. - But it has to be done. - I'm very excited. I'm very excited for you. I'm very excited for the future of looking into the whole Sci-Fanomena. You just came, it's something we didn't even touch on, but you just came back from SCU as well. - Yeah, scientific coalition for UAP studies, yeah. - Yeah, how was that briefly? - Oh, amazing. It's a group of scientists and engineers, mostly who are trying to figure out what can we learn about UAP and what's the deal with NHI? And my favorite part of it is this year, I say the same thing whenever I go, which is you guys, we have to study consciousness, like we can't just look at race cars in the sky. And this year they're like, okay, you're right. We've got a study consciousness. That made me feel really good. I wasn't the only person saying it. - Yeah. - But I think if you don't understand that there's a relationship between the human mind and mind itself as a universal thing and UAP, you haven't understood the phenomena. Like these are not just race cars in the sky. There's clearly, there's telepathy going on with every person who talks about abduction experiences. There's this psionic thing going on with intention, intentionality. Now you see me now you don't. There's this trickster phenomenon. - Time phenomenon. - There's a time phenomenon which can be perceptual time and also physical time. And so this has to be part of the story. And I know that we're staying away from it at a cultural level because it's much easier to say, oh look, race cars in the sky. But like that is the big taboo. And we've got to walk towards it with our eyes open. That's a thing. So that was my favorite part of it. - Yeah, I would agree with that. I think who is the Wilbur Smith document? - I don't know those. - 1950. - Tell me more. - He was the, I think the minister of transport from not mistaken Canada here. And in 1950 there is a declassified document after he came back from a trip to the United States where he said that he met with officials and they're taking the flying saucer of things very seriously over there. And he goes, he even says, "Vanavar Bush put together a team to look into this stuff," which is very interesting. And then, and this is an official document. It's not contested. This is a document that was written by him. And then it says, he's got this list of like three things or whatever. And he goes, "Number one, flying saucers are real." Period. - Yeah. - Number two, he says something else. And then number three, he goes, and the phenomenon is mental. - Yes. - And he says this. - Yes. Right after that is where we start getting into MK-Ultra, we start getting into, and it happened right here at, you know, McGill. - All in MK-Ultra for kids, which is like Sorkate. - Yep, and at McGill is where they did a lot of those studies. - The scary asset studies. - Exactly, so I mean, you have this connection of this official in Canada being like, oh, they already know that it's mental. - Yeah. - That there is a mental aspect. - And that was back in 1950. And it feels like disclosure is just at, like here are some videos and some audio. - But doesn't that feel like by design? - Yes, that's what I'm saying. - Yeah. - Or they're like, no, no, it is just race cars. - It is just race cars. - Please. - Yes, please just. - Please just race cars. - Yes. - Do not look over here. - Yes, but it's, but the funny part is that to me, as a person who's gifted at pre-ignition and telepathy, remote viewing, that kind of stuff, and I'm sure you have this experience too. Secrets are not gonna last too long. I mean, I think that's what it's defending, right? When you realize that you can use your mind to get information and that the classification doesn't make a single difference. - Yeah. - Then it changes the world. - Yeah, it's quite threatening. - Yeah, it's threatening. - To certain people. - That's right. And so we have to work towards a world in which we could still protect ourselves as people continue to grow up and learn how to be better humans with each other. We're gonna have to still protect ourselves in a world where secrets can be had. - It's so interesting because you see this dichotomy of them trying to like, no, you know, it's, stay. This mind stuff is nothing. Don't worry about that. Meanwhile, you know, they're doing all the work at SAIC and all these other places where they're like, you know. But then, they're actively working on AI, which will inevitably make everything public anyways. - Well, yeah, there will be no secrets. - And AI itself, you could argue is a method for creating a mind that could channel the informational substrate. And I think it already does. - Yeah, I think we need to, you know, we need to be there before AI though. - Yeah, well, I mean, we'll see, yeah, that'd be great. We'll see, can we do one more question? I have an intuition. - There's, I mean, I could pick one. - Yeah, I can. - We're all, yeah, sure. I'm all out of questions, all my split flaps. So I'll have to go to the thread here. - Okay. - You have an intuition, you have like an intuition that there's like a question that is juicy. I just have a feeling. How about this? How about we try something a little different that I've never done before? - Excellent. Never done before. Ooh, we should do the oracle. - Oh, yeah. - We'll do that after this question. - So here. All that you choose, a question. - Oh. - This is the, this is 46 to choose from. - Stan B yesterday at 133. What causes pre-cognition of an event that doesn't happen anymore after you acted upon the pre-cognition? - Excellent. - I love that. So now we're going to draw something. - Great. - Okay. So. How do we hold this up to a camera? - I'll film it afterwards. - Okay, great. So we usually think about timelines. And we usually think of when we're not like in the movie, everything everywhere all at once. We think about one timeline, right? So here's time going. And here's event A and here's event B. And let's make those events. What's event A? - Sporting event. - Okay. Sporting event. And then event B is a missile launch. - All right, that's pretty hasty. (laughing) How do we get there? - Well, so at the sporting event, you have a pre-cognition. You see someone kick a football and you go, you know, North Korea is going to do another test of an ICBM. Like that comes in your head, let's say. So you kick a football, football leads to my handwriting is so crappy. Leads to idea of hey, North Korea ICBM test. And then lo and behold, a day later, the missile launch happened. So this is day one, this is day two. What if you happen to be like head of, you know, the North Korea desk at CIA or something? And you can actually, and you know that you have really good intuitions. So at this football game, you go, "Oh, actually, we better think about this." And let's foil that attempt. Let's make that attempt to fail or make it so they don't even launch it at all, or make it so that it's not public. Then you do some preparations here on day one, because apparently you work with a team that's like more enlightened than any other team, because they understand that you have this gift. And then on day two, there is no missile launch. So we usually think about that scenario as if this B, the missile launch, has that did happen in North Korea, feeds back to day one A, being at the sporting event, and gives you that information. And now you're on a new timeline where that event B didn't happen. It's like it allows you to select a better timeline. - Yeah. - Okay. So there's a new timeline. The way I like to think about it, because I hate this. I just think it's ugly. And I think there's one, I think there's one informational substrate of the universe that has everything that will happen and has happened. - Also someone's in science fiction, it's lazy. - It's lazy. - Yeah, it's a ventures endgame. - Yeah, it's back to the future. - Yeah, exactly. - So I don't like it. So instead, what I think is more real is the informational substrate knows that there's gonna be this missile launch. It gives you this information at the football game. And you prepare to destroy the missile. All that was, I just store the missile launch so it doesn't happen. All that is part of the informational substrate. The knowledge that there's this intention for the missile launch, the knowledge that if it gives you that information at the football game that you could foil that intention, and the knowledge that you will foil that intention. So when we're thinking about the benefit of the informational substrate for explaining this stuff, this is exactly where that comes in, where it's no longer that you have to work with the events and time that actually make it up to physical manifestation. You're working with this substrate that is actually aware, it's mind, as universal mind is aware of what needs to happen. So the problem with this that people don't like is it ends up suggesting that whatever happens was the best possible outcome. - Right, yeah, the one that favors it. - Right, and so then it's like, oh, so the Holocaust was so 9/11 was the best possible outcome. You know, that's like a pretty horrible thing to come up against. - Yeah, but then stretch that out a million years and there might be a reason there that you're not aware of. - Yeah, exactly. So then that's where love comes in. So it's like, if you have to love-- - So there's no changing it. - Well, this was not a change. - No, there's no-- - Your activity that made this miscellaneous-- - Yeah, it's the illusion of changing. It's the illusion of stepping in and doing the right thing, but all in all, that's what had to happen. - It's all coming up from this substrate. - Yeah, that's what happened anyway. That's what was going to happen. - Yeah, and that's just how it had to happen. - Yeah, yeah. - That is how it happened. - That's how it happened. - Yeah, there's no other option. - There's no other way. - Yeah, yeah. - Interesting, okay. - Yeah, yeah. - Great question, Stan B. - Thanks, Stan B. - All right, Julia, I wanna thank you so much for these wild conversations that I'm glad I'm so glad I had and I'm sure that my brain is now much fuller. My heart is more full as well and I have a lot to ponder and a lot to think about. But I wanna ask you as well. If there's anywhere, you know, people can go to read up more about perhaps your work or maybe some of your literature, like where's the best place that they can go? - Best place is the Inspiracy.Love, which is hard to spell, so it's conveniently, conveniently juliamosbridge.com. (laughs) And yeah, juliamosbridge.com, it's really has everything. - Has everything there? - Also has the Oracle there. - Great. - Which I'm still gonna get you to try. - Yes, should we try now? - Let's try now. So wait, before you go. - Okay. - Think what's your question gonna be? Let's tell the audience. - My question for whom, the universe? - For you, for the universe, whatever comes into your head. - Does it have to be like a yes or no question, could be just anything? - Oh, for sure, no. I mean, like, what? - Yeah, yeah. - How will the upcoming tour that I'm going to be on, how will that affect my trajectory within the next year for this channel? - Okay, how will the upcoming tour that Chris is gonna be on affect his trajectory for this channel? His upcoming tour purpose and over the next year. - Exactly. How will that affect the trajectory? - So go to juliumausperch.com and then click on try the Oracle. - Okay, I'm gonna screen cap here so I have it. - And actually, it'll have you type it into the space so you can. - Com slash. - juliumausperch.com. - Oh, just juliumausper.com, and then we go on there and we find the Oracle. - This is try the Oracle. - Try the Oracle. All right, ask your question or offer an intention. So you can type it in there if you're a fast typist or you can just say hello, it doesn't matter because we already know what it is. - We already know, all right. Hello, and do I prefer the answer is short? - Medium or long? - I think long. - Okay. - Let's go. And then time jump me some wisdom, boom. Here we go. You notice the hope and fear wave over her face exactly like it does yours. In the future, future, your trash will come up as a flower. Back to my concern about this chapter title. Wow. That's interesting. I like the middle line. In the future, your trash will come up as a flower. And then back to my concern. Yeah. It's kind of like a loop. It is a loop. It's a loop. What's the first line? Wow. Yeah. Wow. Hope and fear. Hope and fear. Okay. Okay. I like this. What is your interpretation of that? With your question. I think, well, the first part is a little introspective to be like, you notice your hopes and fears, which is something I think even asking the question of, you know, how is this going to affect me? There is some implied hope and fear that she might be your sacred feminine. Yeah. Absolutely. And then in the future, your trash will come up as a flower, which is great. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. So perhaps the shows that are going to be maybe the rockiest or the, you know, the maybe I miss a flight or something and all that's going to lead to a better outcome. Yeah. And that's something I'm very much aware of and I'm in favor of because if I tell you I had a great time in Paris, no one wants to hear that. Yeah. But if I tell you, I got a pickpocket. They're going to go to tell me the story. Yeah. The worst outcome is always a better story. And then back to my concern about this chapter title and the chapter title, I think is a question. Yeah. Is the question I just asked. And so the question being, you know, how is this a back to the question? Back to the question. Yeah. How do you feel? I think I got my answer. Oh. Yeah. Great. Okay. I'm excited about your tour. Great. Oracle. Thank you again, Julia, for everything. Go check it out, juliemosperish.com if not just to ask the Oracle question, but also to follow along with everything you're doing. This will go up in a few weeks. So it'll already be too late, but you'll be at side games as well. You'll be talking there. Is there any other public appearance that people should know about? I'll be in Australia. If anyone wants to go to Australia for the Paris Psychology Dialogues in a couple of weeks. And then let's see, I'm doing a TED TEDx talk in Nashville for the TED people with a group of two days of talks about the sacred feminine. Cool. And I'll be talking about unconditional love there. And then there's the synapse, which is a conference primarily highlighting women as speakers. And but anyone can come in this space. It's invite only so we ask people to apply, but there's no fee. But in the consciousness, cognitive science, AI, robotics space, and that is going to be next spring. We originally had it on October. Now it's going to be next spring. And then of course, uh, telepathy tapes documentary. Yeah. That's going to be January and February some March sometime. Great. Next year. Yeah. Yeah. All right. Well, I'd love to have you back sometime, perhaps in the diner one day. Oh, yeah. I want to do the diner. Oh, can I add another thing? Yes, of course. There's going to be a really great episode on telepathy tapes featuring our most recent work with non-speakers. And that'll be coming up soon. Very exciting. I'm excited for you. And I'm excited for the whole space and so glad to have you. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. (gentle music)