From: Haunter@castles.com (Haunter) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: OBE Survey Results Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 07:29:00 GMT Organization: A.S.I./Psi -App/WCS Lines: 155 Message-ID: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: p-067.newsdawg.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.452 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!enews.sgi.com!pln-w!spln!dex!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!enews4 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54144 Here's a tabulation of the survey results. Some people didn't answer some questions. If comments let me make a judgement, I'd score it N/A or not sure. Also, you can insert "don't know" and "not sure", for Not Applicable, depending on the wording. On question 16, this was the kind of question that brought up lots of different opinions that cannot be put into Yes or No. However, the majority of the answers were in the vain of "only when the skeptics have an OBE themselves...". Thanks again for taking part. Pat xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 1. Have you had an Out of Body Experience? Yes: 13 No : 3 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2. If so, how many, approximately? Zero: 3 1-10 3 11-20 1 20-50 2 More 7 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 3. If not, do you hope to have one? Yes: 3 No: 1 N/A 12 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 4. Spontaneous or Induced? Spont. 5 Induced: 3 Mix 6 N/A 2 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 5. If you haven't had an OBE, do you think that reading the experiences of others helps in your understanding of the experience? Yes: 7 No: 1 N/A 8 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 6. Do you believe that OBEs are an indication that something leaves the physical body? Yes: 3 No: 9 N/A 4 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 7. If so, do you believe that this "something" is related to survival after death? Yes: 6 No: 9 N/A 1 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 8. If not, do you still think that this "something" can interact with the physical world? Yes: 7 No: 6 N/A 3 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do you believe that OBEs are all in the head? Yes: 8 No: 7 N/A 1 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 10. If so, do you think it is still possible that information about the physical world, outside your immediate surroundings, can be access during the OBE experience? Yes: 9 No: 3 N/A 4 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 11. If you have not experienced OBEs, are you likely, or unlikely, to believe other people's related experience, regardless of that person's stated opinion as to whether one actually leaves the body or not? Yes: 4 Not: 0 N/A 12 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 12. If you have experienced OBEs, is this enough "proof" to you of the validity of the experience? Yes: 9 No: 2 N/A 5 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 13. Do you believe it is important to provide "proof" of the validity of your experience to those who would doubt that validity? Yes: 3 No: 12 Na 1 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 14. If it is not important, does the expressed doubt of skeptics as to the validity of the OBE experience dissuade you from publicly sharing your experiences? Yes: 4 No: 10 Na 1 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 15. Is it important to you that the experience of OBE be validated through scientific validation? Yes: 6 No: 10 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 17. If no, is the experience itself rewarding enough to continue to pursue it, despite the lack of scienific validation and the criticism of skeptics and non-experiencers? Yes: 15 Na 1 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 18. Regardless of the scientific validation of the experience, do you intend to continue to share any subsequent experiences with the group, even if it means that there will be those that question you about it? Yes: 10 No. 1 N/a 5 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 19. If so, do you think that this sharing of experiences can be of benefit to lurkers and active pursuers of the experience, regardless of the possible criticisms you may get? Yes: 14 No: 1 Na 1 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 20. Do you think that anyone would purposely deceive the group by making up an OBE account? Yes: 13 Na 2 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 21. Do you consider yourself a "spiritual" person? Yes: 11 No: 3 Na 2 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 22. Do you think "spirituality" is an important part of your OB experience? Yes: 9 No. 5 Na: 2 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 23, Do you believe in ESP? Yes: 11 No: 3 N/a 2 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 24. Have you had an ESP experience in your life? Yes: 9 No: 6 Na 1 -- Knowledge is the Antidote for Fear http://www.whitecrowsociety.com http://www.legendsmagazine.net/pan/rayn/rpm ###### From: "Lars Foleide" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 15:44:18 +0200 Organization: UNINETT news service Lines: 174 Message-ID: <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 158.38.79.117 X-Trace: snipp.uninett.no 971098934 12231 158.38.79.117 (9 Oct 2000 13:42:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news-abuse@uninett.no X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!machtgarnix.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!news.tele.dk!128.39.3.166!uninett.no!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54101 Nice survery, I must say.... But the results was a bit surprising.. ..most people believe in ESP, while very few believes that "something" is leaving the body. And surprisingly few thinks that OBEs has any connection or relations to life after death. Oh well, I guess there is still hope, since most people believe in ESP.. One should take one step at the time... ;-) Cheers, Lars Haunter wrote in message news:3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com... > Here's a tabulation of the survey results. Some people didn't answer > some questions. If comments let me make a judgement, I'd score it N/A > or not sure. > Also, you can insert "don't know" and "not sure", for Not Applicable, > depending on the wording. > On question 16, this was the kind of question that brought up lots of > different opinions that cannot be put into Yes or No. However, the > majority of the answers were in the vain of "only when the skeptics > have an OBE themselves...". > Thanks again for taking part. > Pat > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 1. Have you had an Out of Body Experience? > Yes: 13 > No : 3 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 2. If so, how many, approximately? > Zero: 3 > 1-10 3 > 11-20 1 > 20-50 2 > More 7 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 3. If not, do you hope to have one? > Yes: 3 > No: 1 > N/A 12 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 4. Spontaneous or Induced? > Spont. 5 > Induced: 3 > Mix 6 > N/A 2 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 5. If you haven't had an OBE, do you think that reading the > experiences of others helps in your understanding of the experience? > Yes: 7 > No: 1 > N/A 8 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 6. Do you believe that OBEs are an indication that something leaves > the physical body? > Yes: 3 > No: 9 > N/A 4 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 7. If so, do you believe that this "something" is related to survival > after death? > Yes: 6 > No: 9 > N/A 1 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 8. If not, do you still think that this "something" can interact with > the physical world? > Yes: 7 > No: 6 > N/A 3 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Do you believe that OBEs are all in the head? > Yes: 8 > No: 7 > N/A 1 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 10. If so, do you think it is still possible that information about > the physical world, outside your immediate surroundings, can be > access during the OBE experience? > Yes: 9 > No: 3 > N/A 4 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 11. If you have not experienced OBEs, are you likely, or unlikely, to > believe other people's related experience, regardless of that > person's stated opinion as to whether one actually leaves the body or > not? > Yes: 4 > Not: 0 > N/A 12 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 12. If you have experienced OBEs, is this enough "proof" to you of the > validity of the experience? > Yes: 9 > No: 2 > N/A 5 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 13. Do you believe it is important to provide "proof" of the validity > of your experience to those who would doubt that validity? > Yes: 3 > No: 12 > Na 1 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 14. If it is not important, does the expressed doubt of skeptics as to > the validity of the OBE experience dissuade you from publicly sharing > your experiences? > Yes: 4 > No: 10 > Na 1 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 15. Is it important to you that the experience of OBE be validated > through scientific validation? > Yes: 6 > No: 10 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 17. If no, is the experience itself rewarding enough to continue to > pursue it, despite the lack of scienific validation and the criticism > of skeptics and non-experiencers? > Yes: 15 > Na 1 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 18. Regardless of the scientific validation of the experience, do you > intend to continue to share any subsequent experiences with the > group, even if it means that there will be those that question you > about it? > Yes: 10 > No. 1 > N/a 5 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 19. If so, do you think that this sharing of experiences can be of > benefit to lurkers and active pursuers of the experience, regardless > of the possible criticisms you may get? > Yes: 14 > No: 1 > Na 1 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 20. Do you think that anyone would purposely deceive the group by > making up an OBE account? > Yes: 13 > Na 2 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 21. Do you consider yourself a "spiritual" person? > Yes: 11 > No: 3 > Na 2 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 22. Do you think "spirituality" is an important part of your OB > experience? > Yes: 9 > No. 5 > Na: 2 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 23, Do you believe in ESP? > Yes: 11 > No: 3 > N/a 2 > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > 24. Have you had an ESP experience in your life? > Yes: 9 > No: 6 > Na 1 > > > > -- > Knowledge is the Antidote for Fear > http://www.whitecrowsociety.com > http://www.legendsmagazine.net/pan/rayn/rpm ###### From: Haunter@castles.com (Haunter) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 14:45:42 GMT Organization: A.S.I./Psi -App/WCS Lines: 35 Message-ID: <39ebd80b.61667144@cnews.newsguy.com> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> NNTP-Posting-Host: p-446.newsdawg.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.452 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.onemain.com!feed1.onemain.com!cyclone-sf.pbi.net!165.113.238.17!pln-w!spln!dex!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!enews4 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54132 On Mon, 9 Oct 2000 15:44:18 +0200, "Lars Foleide" wrote: >Nice survery, I must say.... > >But the results was a bit surprising.. >..most people believe in ESP, while very few believes that >"something" is leaving the body. And surprisingly few thinks >that OBEs has any connection or relations to life after death. > >Oh well, I guess there is still hope, since most people believe >in ESP.. >One should take one step at the time... ;-) > > >Cheers, >Lars Thanks Lars; I was beginning to think nobody read the results :) I found it quite encouraging that so few people let the skepticism of others affect their sharing of experiences or their pursuit of the OBE. Also, I liked seeing the nearly even split between "all in the head" and "something" more. I'll reserve further comment in hopes that others will chime in about what did or did not surprise them about the outcome of the survey. I see quite a lot of interesting correlations. Thanks again. -- Knowledge is the Antidote for Fear http://www.whitecrowsociety.com http://www.legendsmagazine.net/pan/rayn/rpm ###### From: "Lars Foleide" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 02:27:24 +0200 Organization: UNINETT news service Lines: 137 Message-ID: <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: 158.38.79.117 X-Trace: snipp.uninett.no 971223917 12384 158.38.79.117 (11 Oct 2000 00:25:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news-abuse@uninett.no X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!fr.clara.net!small.fr.clara.net!news.tele.dk!128.39.3.166!uninett.no!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54352 Gunnar Ljungstrand wrote in message news:39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se... > > But this is also were I no longer agree with you, I think you are > > making it more simple than it truly is. > > It is quite possible you are right. Things rarely are as simple as they > seem at first look. However, one must start a model somewhere. Always a good start... > > > I believe in something you might call several bodies, one for each > > plane. I believe that there is an energy around our body, I believe in > > chakras, and I believe that there is "something" that is leaving our > > body when we have OBE and when we die. > > Allright, I accept the existence of "subtle bodies" and chakras, at > least in the same sense that the physical body exists. Still, even when > accepting this being so there is no need for anything to "leave" - it > can be thought of simply as changing the focus. > > You know, in the same way you switch between active programs on your > desktop by clicking on them. If you, say, switch from Napster to Winamp > ;-P nothing *leaves* Napster and enters Winamp. Napster is just put on > autopilot, while Winamp is active to receive commands. Yet both exist at > the same time. Can you see what I´m getting at? Yeh, I see what you mean, and understand why you might have this view. But the main difference from me and you is that I have another big interest, and that is orgone energy. Or that is at least what I like to call it, it has at least 27 other names. (Given by at least 27 other people, that alone should suggest that such an energy actually exist). And I see a connection between out of body experiences, psionics, remote viewing, the like and orgone energy. So that your model does not fit into to my set of knowledge, it is both more logical for me to explain it with energies, more understandable, and much of what I know backs that up. Meaning that there is actually something that is travelling, not just a change of focus. It is also my understanding that with a better understanding of this energy, how it works, what affects it, and how it affects us, then out of body experiences should be a problem to induce either. But it is a very subtle energy that is hard to conduct research on, were sensitive people undoubtly is nice to have. But that doesn't mean that it is impossible... > > > You just don't waste energy even though the consciousness may not be > > at this plane. > > I think it is the waking-conscious mind that requires a lot of energy > when focused in the Astral, and that is why most OBEs are so short - you > just run out of energy. I think that might be correct, I guess it require energy to be a place that you aren't meant to be. > > > I believe in a collective consciousness and that we are connected at > > some point, but I still think that you are alive just like the tree, > > and that both you and the tree has its own consciousness, but that > > they are still able to connect.. > > Yes, in a deeper sense me and the tree are one and the same, in the same > way seemingly separate islands are joined at the ocean bottom. Nice metaphor... :) > > > How do you explain ghosts and disturbed souls then? > > Hmm... ghosts is such a wide term, probably containing many very > different phenomena, much like UFOs. > > I have never actually seen or felt a ghost, but I quite literally have > *been* one and spooked people (during OBEs in the real-time zone you > basically *are* a ghost), so I certainly accept the existence of ghosts > and similar entities. Interesting... but I don't think ghosts are just people that are other people at are travelling out of their body. And that experience also suggests that you are an energy concentration.. > > As for them then, I tend to think that at least some ghosts are spirits > whose focus have remained in the physical after death, as is the > traditional view. Others may be something different. > > > They have something unsolved here on the earth, usually die a tragic > > death, and fail to move on. > > Yes. > > > Why are they still here in the physical plane when their consciousness > > or "something" isn't actually here...? > > They are stuck and don´t realize there is anything else. > > BTW, I have heard that many skeptics and materialists end up becoming > earthbound upon death. Since they don´t believe in any afterlife, they > cannot accept that they are dead and yet still existing. So they > convince themselves they are still alive, only dreaming. Or so it is > said - I don´t know. Hehehe.... doesn't surprise me at all... Should we do something to 'save' these skeptics? :) > > Förresten Lars, har du haft någon OBE än? Det är litet glest mellan dem > för mig nuförtiden iallafall. :-( > Du er inne i en dårlig periode ja... Nei, jeg har igrunnen aldri skikkelig prøvd å ha en OBE. Men så har jeg heller ikke hatt særlig med tid før nå. Jeg var mest aktiv her før jeg drog i militæret, etter det gikk det hand i hand med høgskolen. Der jeg var ekstremt sosial det første året, rota meg inn i et forhold og fikk mye å tenke på som ikke var særlig relatert til 'spirituel utvikling'... Så jobbet jeg veldig mye overtid i sommer, men i år har jeg gjort en del forandringer, blitt mindre sosial, leser mer bøker og er mer fokusert. Mest på grunn av at noen gode kompiser av meg har flyttet, men har enda ikke gjort noe særlig annet enn å samle inn information. Men har for første gang tenkt å gjøre noe seriøst med tanke på OBE og lucid dreams. Skal prøve alle mulige fremgangsmåter jeg kommer på, og det er faen meg det mange... :) (Skal også eksperimentere mer med orgone energi) Regards, Lars ###### From: Gunnar Ljungstrand Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 19:23:54 +0200 Organization: Telenordia Lines: 153 Message-ID: <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> Reply-To: dervak@algonet.se NNTP-Posting-Host: sdu210-239.ppp.algonet.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: zingo.tninet.se 971285152 10760 195.163.239.210 (11 Oct 2000 17:25:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@algo.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 11 Oct 2000 17:25:52 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: sv,en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!uni-erlangen.de!newsfeed1.telenordia.se!algonet!pepsi.tninet.se!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54344 Hi Lars, Lars Foleide wrote: > Yeh, I see what you mean, and understand why you might have this view. It is mostly the result of the experience with OBEs I have had, even if I am certainly influenced by the ideas of others to some extent too. For instance: Not in a single one of my about 200 OBEs have I had to return "manually" and "reinsert" myself into my physbod. When the experience ends, I just fade away and find myself back. No sense of movement whatsoever. On the other hand I do have a sense of movement *at the start* of most of my OBEs, when I "rise up" and separate from my physbod, after getting the vibes. Usually it takes some willpower to "get loose", but even after that movement is sluggish and perception vague, but getting better the more I distance myself from my physbod. This has led me to this hypothesis: That I, when I get the vibes, am *already* focused in the Astral, but that my astral body still is consonant in position with the physical. There seems to be an attraction between them growing weaker by distance, which would explain the effort needed to move away. Also, being in an OBE seems to require a lot of energy, and when that energy runs out focus seems to be automatically shifted back to the physical body (the astral one presumably being dragged back too). This is but one of the reasons I have to think of it more as *focusing*. > But the main difference from me and you is that I have another big > interest, and that is orgone energy. Or that is at least what I like > to call it, it has at least 27 other names. (Given by at least 27 > other people, that alone should suggest that such an energy actually > exist). Ok, any reason why such an energy could not exist even in a "focus"-scenario? > And I see a connection between out of body experiences, psionics, > remote viewing, the like and orgone energy. So that your model does > not fit into to my set of knowledge, it is both more logical for me to > explain it with energies, more understandable, and much of what I know > backs that up. Meaning that there is actually something that is > travelling, not just a change of focus. I can see what you mean, and I´m not saying that you are wrong; I honestly don´t *know* how it works and my model is just that - a model. However, my experience so far seems to back up the "focus" model rather than literal travel. That does not detract anything at all from the beauty of it though, quite the contrary. > It is also my understanding that with a better understanding of this > energy, how it works, what affects it, and how it affects us, then out > of body experiences should be a problem to induce either. Possibly, but I don´t think we will see any OBE-producing device any time soon. It seems to me that something that has resisted understanding by the greatest mystics of all times probably will not yield its secrets so easy. > But it is a very subtle energy that is hard to conduct research on, > were sensitive people undoubtly is nice to have. But that doesn't mean > that it is impossible... Nothing is impossible. > > Yes, in a deeper sense me and the tree are one and the same, in the > > same way seemingly separate islands are joined at the ocean bottom. > > Nice metaphor... :) Thanks, but I can´t take credit for that one myself. I read it in a book somewhere. > Interesting... but I don't think ghosts are just people that are other > people at are travelling out of their body. Not that all are, of course, but some probably are. BTW, I did this in a few OBEs in the beginning. At one time I had flown into someone´s apartment, and I was annoyed with that noone seemed to notice me. I floated upstairs and into a bedroom, where a woman sat reading a book. I tried to talk to her, but she didn´t look up. So I pushed down a few books from a shelf. She was startled by the crash and rose up to have a look, but still didn´t seem to see me. Then I pushed down a few more. Now when she clearly saw them sliding out of the shelf (by themselves, supposedly) and falling down she looked very scared and bolted out from the room. Afterward I was somewhat ashamed with myself for doing this, but at the time all I could think of was getting her attention (and I wanted to see if I could "haunt" too ;-). > And that experience also suggests that you are an energy > concentration.. Hmm... more like I am *in* an energy concentration I would say. > Hehehe.... doesn't surprise me at all... > Should we do something to 'save' these skeptics? :) No. Then we would be no better than proselytizing religious people or skeptics out to "save" us "stupid woo-woos" from ourselves. They have the right to their view, and the right to their own mistakes. Everyone must walk their own path. Actually, I don´t think anyone should try to "save" anyone else under any circumstance. That invariably entails coercion and that is *wrong*. If someone is ready for OBEs s/he will have them, sooner or later. If someone can´t accept at least the possibility, s/he is quite simply not ready for them at this time. > Du er inne i en dårlig periode ja... > Nei, jeg har igrunnen aldri skikkelig prøvd å ha en OBE. Men så har > jeg heller ikke hatt særlig med tid før nå. Jeg var mest aktiv her før > jeg drog i militæret, etter det gikk det hand i hand med høgskolen. > Der jeg var ekstremt sosial det første året, rota meg inn i et forhold > og fikk mye å tenke på som ikke var særlig relatert til 'spirituel > utvikling'... Jag förstår... ;-) > Så jobbet jeg veldig mye overtid i sommer, men i år har jeg gjort en > del forandringer, blitt mindre sosial, leser mer bøker og er mer > fokusert. Mest på grunn av at noen gode kompiser av meg har flyttet, > men har enda ikke gjort noe særlig annet enn å samle inn information. > Men har for første gang tenkt å gjøre noe seriøst med tanke på OBE og > lucid dreams. Skal prøve alle mulige fremgangsmåter jeg kommer på, og > det er faen meg det mange... :) (Skal også eksperimentere mer med > orgone energi) Ok. Av någon anledning har jag inte haft så värst många LDs. Har väl haft ett tiotal eller så, men många fler OBEer (fast inte så många just nu tyvärr). > Regards, > Lars See you out there... /Gunnar --------------------- - Question Authority! - Yeah, Says Who? --------------------- ###### Message-ID: <39E4B384.38CE@not-here.net> From: Janice X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 12 NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 13:34:33 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv2-Pbx9Un5UzWcF3k2BJgWvSaPSb+fzyV44u4PyJ1aI4RYLqwm1lfsRcRew9nWKLaB+6GPiAwvr0JQOSy7!HqbhxoUYUevTMCfVnh6sTfWXNhI= X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 18:34:33 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!nntp.flash.net!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news1.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54301 Gunnar Ljungstrand wrote: > > I have never actually seen or felt a ghost, but I quite literally have > *been* one and spooked people (during OBEs in the real-time zone you > basically *are* a ghost), so I certainly accept the existence of ghosts > and similar entities. Have you spooked known people who you later verified as having seen your OBE form? -- http://sites.netscape.net/jvogelsong/ ###### Message-ID: <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> From: Janice X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 47 NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 14:42:45 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv2-BTjWgaYtxg04LK3iPSngy/N6ZPh6wtvxn0i76gDFRCtLY4uW7WdLr/JqfQaDjJOJLYCqw2XaSCLpDs7!bm/kdoBRatgINR6ZWwoyoDCU4/8= X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 15:46:08 -0400 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!nntp-out.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!xfer13.netnews.com!netnews.com!newsfeed.skycache.com!Cidera!cyclone-sjo1.usenetserver.com!news-out.usenetserver.com!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!nntp2.aus1.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news5.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54297 Gunnar Ljungstrand wrote: > > Hi Lars, > > Lars Foleide wrote: > > > Yeh, I see what you mean, and understand why you might have this view. > > It is mostly the result of the experience with OBEs I have had, even if > I am certainly influenced by the ideas of others to some extent too. > > For instance: Not in a single one of my about 200 OBEs have I had to > return "manually" and "reinsert" myself into my physbod. When the > experience ends, I just fade away and find myself back. No sense of > movement whatsoever. > > On the other hand I do have a sense of movement *at the start* of most > of my OBEs, when I "rise up" and separate from my physbod, after getting > the vibes. Usually it takes some willpower to "get loose", but even > after that movement is sluggish and perception vague, but getting better > the more I distance myself from my physbod. > > This has led me to this hypothesis: That I, when I get the vibes, am > *already* focused in the Astral, but that my astral body still is > consonant in position with the physical. There seems to be an attraction > between them growing weaker by distance, which would explain the effort > needed to move away. Those were the same observations that helped lead me to conclude that my OBEs were dreams. Personally I'd suggest that the sluggish movement and vague perception may be due either to the brain not being fully into REM at first, or simply to paying too much attention to what can still be detected of the state of one's physical body (i.e. you can't move and it's dark). I would tend to doubt that distance from the physical body is what makes these things improve, because they improve for me eventually even if I just stay right in the bedroom. This suggests that time is the key rather than distance. Perhaps you could test this out sometime in one of your own OBEs? > Also, being in an OBE seems to require a lot of energy, and when that > energy runs out focus seems to be automatically shifted back to the > physical body (the astral one presumably being dragged back too). Or the state of your brain changes and you wake up. ;) -- http://sites.netscape.net/jvogelsong/ ###### From: Gunnar Ljungstrand Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 18:47:00 +0200 Organization: Telenordia Lines: 41 Message-ID: <39E5EB04.9BF0D2FB@algonet.se> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> Reply-To: dervak@algonet.se NNTP-Posting-Host: du182-90.ppp.algonet.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: cubacola.tninet.se 971369214 20743 195.100.90.182 (12 Oct 2000 16:46:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@algo.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 Oct 2000 16:46:54 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: sv,en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!uni-erlangen.de!newsfeed1.telenordia.se!algonet!pepsi.tninet.se!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54398 Hi Janice, Janice wrote: > Those were the same observations that helped lead me to conclude that > my OBEs were dreams. Another way of seeing it is that dreams are OBEs... ;-) > Personally I'd suggest that the sluggish movement and vague perception > may be due either to the brain not being fully into REM at first, Hmm... AFAICR OBEs are not generally associated with REM, but I could be wrong. > or simply to paying too much attention to what can still be detected > of the state of one's physical body (i.e. you can't move and it's > dark). I would tend to doubt that distance from the physical body > is what makes these things improve, because they improve for me > eventually even if I just stay right in the bedroom. This suggests > that time is the key rather than distance. Perhaps you could test > this out sometime in one of your own OBEs? I guess it is possible. Generally I don´t stay with my physbod for long; the time is always precious so I tend to go away at once, regardless of whether I can see or not. > Or the state of your brain changes and you wake up. ;) Sure, but why does the state of my brain change then? Why are OBEs and LDs (usually) so unstable and short? See you out there... /Gunnar --------------------- - Question Authority! - Yeah, Says Who? --------------------- ###### From: Gunnar Ljungstrand Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 18:47:09 +0200 Organization: Telenordia Lines: 40 Message-ID: <39E5EB0D.435E133F@algonet.se> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <39E4B384.38CE@not-here.net> Reply-To: dervak@algonet.se NNTP-Posting-Host: du182-90.ppp.algonet.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: cubacola.tninet.se 971369223 20743 195.100.90.182 (12 Oct 2000 16:47:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@algo.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 12 Oct 2000 16:47:03 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: sv,en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!uni-erlangen.de!newsfeed1.telenordia.se!algonet!pepsi.tninet.se!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54393 Hi Janice, Janice wrote: > Have you spooked known people who you later verified as having seen > your OBE form? Unfortunately not. I have no idea of where these events happened. I must admit that I am not 100% sure I really spooked physical people, say 75% or so. The reason being that this was during a few experiences that somehow felt somewhat different from "standard" astral ones. While I did not know where I was, and so couldn´t compare for any discrepancies, at least there were no strange, alien things. Everything looked modern, western and urban. Also, people could not see me. Usually in the Astral most people can see me. Dreamers may not seem to notice me, but they act like zombies anyway. Seeing without perceiving. Here it was different. Everyone acted normally, except that they did not see me, and that the woman was frightened by the books sliding out from the shelf. Perceiving without seeing, more like it here. Of course I realize this isn´t evidence (for others) that I really did haunt somewhere, but it has made a quite strong impression in my mind, so in the absence of any better hypothesis I say I really *was* a ghost then. See you out there... /Gunnar --------------------- - Question Authority! - Yeah, Says Who? --------------------- ###### Message-ID: <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net> From: Janice X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> <39E5EB04.9BF0D2FB@algonet.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 54 NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 15:20:23 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv2-DfH+vlXKms4EQSQVKF/91BkBkplwO3yU2M0sTuZ800kskX34iEiuYPgyxtW5g++2oD85OUyQdB4b9E5!c9TayovG5txWolC1cRYito5k7hE= X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 20:20:23 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!xfer13.netnews.com!netnews.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!nntp2.aus1.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news1.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54382 Gunnar Ljungstrand wrote: > > Hi Janice, > > Janice wrote: > > > Those were the same observations that helped lead me to conclude that > > my OBEs were dreams. > > Another way of seeing it is that dreams are OBEs... ;-) > > > Personally I'd suggest that the sluggish movement and vague perception > > may be due either to the brain not being fully into REM at first, > > Hmm... AFAICR OBEs are not generally associated with REM, but I could be > wrong. Not all of them have been associated with REM, but they have been in some lab research, including when Haunter was looking into them wa back when. > > or simply to paying too much attention to what can still be detected > > of the state of one's physical body (i.e. you can't move and it's > > dark). I would tend to doubt that distance from the physical body > > is what makes these things improve, because they improve for me > > eventually even if I just stay right in the bedroom. This suggests > > that time is the key rather than distance. Perhaps you could test > > this out sometime in one of your own OBEs? > > I guess it is possible. Generally I don´t stay with my physbod for long; > the time is always precious so I tend to go away at once, regardless of > whether I can see or not. Yep - there is that, and Trish and I have both noticed something of an imperative to move around even if we keep local. > > Or the state of your brain changes and you wake up. ;) > > Sure, but why does the state of my brain change then? Why are OBEs and > LDs (usually) so unstable and short? My guess would be that it's because you're in an anomalous state during them, with your brain chemistry closer to what it is like during an alert waking state than is usual during REM, so there will tend to be a tug towards wakefulness. The neurotransmitters that are supposedly required to sustain critical attention, rational thought and memory storage functions are normally in very low supply during REM, but they are probably around in some quantity to support the increased awareness that is reported in the case of lucid dreams, and, unfortunately for the lucid dreamer who'd like to prolong the state, that would increase the chances of waking up altogether. -- http://sites.netscape.net/jvogelsong/ ###### From: "capuchin" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> <39E5EB04.9BF0D2FB@algonet.se> <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net> Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Lines: 63 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Message-ID: <8ytF5.5029$yH1.248284@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net> X-Trace: +LkLmkygt72gAemwlilzqg+PqQwEdEuXy7wAmhSXAV3kjzQwofgb2Jg+b0z2h1OJB0eNrX+trMpF!1aPoipFtCr0kKdG1zzNkUTfjYDtMMKAhgBnHx/0NHlQ2QD5JwbCqfYUbmDTFfVer0SRq16+KbvCv!1pNWcXC2wJA= X-Complaints-To: abuse@gte.net X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 01:27:32 GMT Distribution: world Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 01:27:33 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!fr.clara.net!small.fr.clara.net!grolier!news-raspail.gip.net!news-peer.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!paloalto-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!paloalto-snr1.gtei.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54543 Janice wrote in message <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net>... >Gunnar Ljungstrand wrote: >> >> Hi Janice, >> >> Janice wrote: >> >> > Those were the same observations that helped lead me to conclude that >> > my OBEs were dreams. >> >> Another way of seeing it is that dreams are OBEs... ;-) >> >> > Personally I'd suggest that the sluggish movement and vague perception >> > may be due either to the brain not being fully into REM at first, >> >> Hmm... AFAICR OBEs are not generally associated with REM, but I could be >> wrong. > >Not all of them have been associated with REM, but they have been in >some lab research, including when Haunter was looking into them wa back >when. > >> > or simply to paying too much attention to what can still be detected >> > of the state of one's physical body (i.e. you can't move and it's >> > dark). I would tend to doubt that distance from the physical body >> > is what makes these things improve, because they improve for me >> > eventually even if I just stay right in the bedroom. This suggests >> > that time is the key rather than distance. Perhaps you could test >> > this out sometime in one of your own OBEs? >> >> I guess it is possible. Generally I don´t stay with my physbod for long; >> the time is always precious so I tend to go away at once, regardless of >> whether I can see or not. > >Yep - there is that, and Trish and I have both noticed something of an >imperative to move around even if we keep local. > >> > Or the state of your brain changes and you wake up. ;) >> >> Sure, but why does the state of my brain change then? Why are OBEs and >> LDs (usually) so unstable and short? > >My guess would be that it's because you're in an anomalous state during >them, with your brain chemistry closer to what it is like during an >alert waking state than is usual during REM, so there will tend to be a >tug towards wakefulness. The neurotransmitters that are supposedly >required to sustain critical attention, rational thought and memory >storage functions are normally in very low supply during REM, but they >are probably around in some quantity to support the increased awareness >that is reported in the case of lucid dreams, and, unfortunately for the >lucid dreamer who'd like to prolong the state, that would increase the >chances of waking up altogether. Hmmm. Thanks for that inclusion. I hadn't considered that. And if we continue to move and stay engaged in the OBE/LD environment, we can keep from waking up. Like a balancing act. Can't get too involved ... but can't be uninvolved either. ###### Message-ID: <39E672A5.673A@not-here.net> From: Janice X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> <39E5EB04.9BF0D2FB@algonet.se> <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net> <8ytF5.5029$yH1.248284@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 72 NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 21:22:20 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv2-27kGh2vrlu7dc7jitkve/dQVXVaWCWXlsQRzDIWzX+l4EllKVJpMrJtu/p2fU50DYYY7PFFGScVFymv!QyxJeWp0I8+EgQ369fJ82STkOSY= X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 02:22:29 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!uni-erlangen.de!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!nmaster.kpnqwest.net!npeer.kpnqwest.net!howland.erols.net!cyclone2.usenetserver.com!news-out.usenetserver.com!novia!nntp2.aus1.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news1.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54372 capuchin wrote: > > Janice wrote in message <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net>... > >Gunnar Ljungstrand wrote: > >> > >> Hi Janice, > >> > >> Janice wrote: > >> > >> > Those were the same observations that helped lead me to conclude that > >> > my OBEs were dreams. > >> > >> Another way of seeing it is that dreams are OBEs... ;-) > >> > >> > Personally I'd suggest that the sluggish movement and vague perception > >> > may be due either to the brain not being fully into REM at first, > >> > >> Hmm... AFAICR OBEs are not generally associated with REM, but I could be > >> wrong. > > > >Not all of them have been associated with REM, but they have been in > >some lab research, including when Haunter was looking into them wa back > >when. > > > >> > or simply to paying too much attention to what can still be detected > >> > of the state of one's physical body (i.e. you can't move and it's > >> > dark). I would tend to doubt that distance from the physical body > >> > is what makes these things improve, because they improve for me > >> > eventually even if I just stay right in the bedroom. This suggests > >> > that time is the key rather than distance. Perhaps you could test > >> > this out sometime in one of your own OBEs? > >> > >> I guess it is possible. Generally I don´t stay with my physbod for long; > >> the time is always precious so I tend to go away at once, regardless of > >> whether I can see or not. > > > >Yep - there is that, and Trish and I have both noticed something of an > >imperative to move around even if we keep local. > > > >> > Or the state of your brain changes and you wake up. ;) > >> > >> Sure, but why does the state of my brain change then? Why are OBEs and > >> LDs (usually) so unstable and short? > > > >My guess would be that it's because you're in an anomalous state during > >them, with your brain chemistry closer to what it is like during an > >alert waking state than is usual during REM, so there will tend to be a > >tug towards wakefulness. The neurotransmitters that are supposedly > >required to sustain critical attention, rational thought and memory > >storage functions are normally in very low supply during REM, but they > >are probably around in some quantity to support the increased awareness > >that is reported in the case of lucid dreams, and, unfortunately for the > >lucid dreamer who'd like to prolong the state, that would increase the > >chances of waking up altogether. > > Hmmm. Thanks for that inclusion. I hadn't considered that. And if we > continue to move and stay engaged in the OBE/LD environment, we > can keep from waking up. That's the tried and true way of prolonging a fading LD, though of course there eventually comes a point where you're just too awake even for that to work. > Like a balancing act. Can't get too involved ... but can't be uninvolved > either. Yes. If you just stand around thinking, the dream will tend to fade; but you have to do some critical thinking, or you'll slip into nonlucidity. -- http://sites.netscape.net/jvogelsong/ ###### Message-ID: <39E68108.4C29@not-here.net> From: Janice X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <39E4B384.38CE@not-here.net> <39E5EB0D.435E133F@algonet.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 49 NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 22:23:41 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv2-GaeTNJ6Iwa2XtakymZsB0jktBdPepRXqERkkdqOY7dl2nMH2ER+vvZjyusYEnobVuKFADUQ+SmCTOcp!2p9PJ4lX6qh9mGfZMbQJvM2X/IM= X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 23:27:04 -0400 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!schlund.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!colt.net!newspeer.clara.net!news.clara.net!news-hub.cableinet.net!cyclone2.usenetserver.com!news-out.usenetserver.com!nntp2.aus1.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news6.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54369 Gunnar Ljungstrand wrote: > > Hi Janice, > > Janice wrote: > > > Have you spooked known people who you later verified as having seen > > your OBE form? > > Unfortunately not. I have no idea of where these events happened. > > I must admit that I am not 100% sure I really spooked physical people, > say 75% or so. > > The reason being that this was during a few experiences that somehow > felt somewhat different from "standard" astral ones. While I did not > know where I was, and so couldn´t compare for any discrepancies, at > least there were no strange, alien things. Everything looked modern, > western and urban. If that had happened to me, I would have concluded after I woke up that because the scene looked so realistic and normal, I more or less convinced myself in the OBE that I was literally disembodied in the physical world, and that the effect with the books and the character's startled reaction simply followed from that assumption. > Also, people could not see me. Usually in the Astral most people can see > me. Dreamers may not seem to notice me, but they act like zombies > anyway. Seeing without perceiving. *Dreamers* in the astral act like zombies? I thought that was the thought-forms. I'll never get all this straight. ;) > Here it was different. Everyone acted normally, except that they did not > see me, and that the woman was frightened by the books sliding out from > the shelf. Perceiving without seeing, more like it here. > > Of course I realize this isn´t evidence (for others) that I really did > haunt somewhere, but it has made a quite strong impression in my mind, > so in the absence of any better hypothesis I say I really *was* a ghost > then. Reminds me a bit of some of my past OBEs when I would feel exuberantly silly and leap out the window just to jump in front of cars in the driveway of the OBE version of my neighborhood pretending to be a ghost so I could see the drivers' startled reactions. :) -- http://sites.netscape.net/jvogelsong/ ###### From: Haunter@castles.com (Haunter) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 04:26:18 GMT Organization: A.S.I./Psi -App/WCS Lines: 56 Message-ID: <39f48ed1.295744178@cnews.newsguy.com> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <39E4B384.38CE@not-here.net> <39E5EB0D.435E133F@algonet.se> <39E68108.4C29@not-here.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: p-460.newsdawg.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.452 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!pln-w!spln!dex!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!enews2 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54505 On Thu, 12 Oct 2000 23:27:04 -0400, Janice wrote: >Gunnar Ljungstrand wrote: >> >> Hi Janice, >> >> Janice wrote: >> >> > Have you spooked known people who you later verified as having seen >> > your OBE form? >> >> Unfortunately not. I have no idea of where these events happened. >> >> I must admit that I am not 100% sure I really spooked physical people, >> say 75% or so. >> >> The reason being that this was during a few experiences that somehow >> felt somewhat different from "standard" astral ones. While I did not >> know where I was, and so couldn´t compare for any discrepancies, at >> least there were no strange, alien things. Everything looked modern, >> western and urban. > >If that had happened to me, I would have concluded after I woke up that >because the scene looked so realistic and normal, I more or less >convinced myself in the OBE that I was literally disembodied in the >physical world, and that the effect with the books and the character's >startled reaction simply followed from that assumption. > >> Also, people could not see me. Usually in the Astral most people can see >> me. Dreamers may not seem to notice me, but they act like zombies >> anyway. Seeing without perceiving. > >*Dreamers* in the astral act like zombies? I thought that was the >thought-forms. I'll never get all this straight. ;) > >> Here it was different. Everyone acted normally, except that they did not >> see me, and that the woman was frightened by the books sliding out from >> the shelf. Perceiving without seeing, more like it here. >> >> Of course I realize this isn´t evidence (for others) that I really did >> haunt somewhere, but it has made a quite strong impression in my mind, >> so in the absence of any better hypothesis I say I really *was* a ghost >> then. > >Reminds me a bit of some of my past OBEs when I would feel exuberantly >silly and leap out the window just to jump in front of cars in the >driveway of the OBE version of my neighborhood pretending to be a ghost >so I could see the drivers' startled reactions. :) That was YOU?! Damned near gave me a heart attack! -- Knowledge is the Antidote for Fear http://www.whitecrowsociety.com http://www.legendsmagazine.net/pan/rayn/rpm ###### Message-ID: <39E6E9CC.6120@not-here.net> From: Janice X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <39E4B384.38CE@not-here.net> <39E5EB0D.435E133F@algonet.se> <39E68108.4C29@not-here.net> <39f48ed1.295744178@cnews.newsguy.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 59 NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 05:48:43 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv2-noA09A/ymNrAIwCnK/v4ck0sAWWA6s2wJnFD6otgpprsT+bzCV5/GhPs7Vwh3Wx851a8lQGoYg1uyNw!PTara1nxXle3UNHRCk0akF1Acgc= X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 10:48:43 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!fu-berlin.de!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!dca1-hub1.news.digex.net!intermedia!cyclone-sf.pbi.net!165.113.238.17!pln-w!extra.newsguy.com!lotsanews.com!nntp2.aus1.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news2.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54375 Haunter wrote: > > On Thu, 12 Oct 2000 23:27:04 -0400, Janice > wrote: > > >Gunnar Ljungstrand wrote: > >> > >> Hi Janice, > >> > >> Janice wrote: > >> > >> > Have you spooked known people who you later verified as having seen > >> > your OBE form? > >> > >> Unfortunately not. I have no idea of where these events happened. > >> > >> I must admit that I am not 100% sure I really spooked physical people, > >> say 75% or so. > >> > >> The reason being that this was during a few experiences that somehow > >> felt somewhat different from "standard" astral ones. While I did not > >> know where I was, and so couldn´t compare for any discrepancies, at > >> least there were no strange, alien things. Everything looked modern, > >> western and urban. > > > >If that had happened to me, I would have concluded after I woke up that > >because the scene looked so realistic and normal, I more or less > >convinced myself in the OBE that I was literally disembodied in the > >physical world, and that the effect with the books and the character's > >startled reaction simply followed from that assumption. > > > >> Also, people could not see me. Usually in the Astral most people can see > >> me. Dreamers may not seem to notice me, but they act like zombies > >> anyway. Seeing without perceiving. > > > >*Dreamers* in the astral act like zombies? I thought that was the > >thought-forms. I'll never get all this straight. ;) > > > >> Here it was different. Everyone acted normally, except that they did not > >> see me, and that the woman was frightened by the books sliding out from > >> the shelf. Perceiving without seeing, more like it here. > >> > >> Of course I realize this isn´t evidence (for others) that I really did > >> haunt somewhere, but it has made a quite strong impression in my mind, > >> so in the absence of any better hypothesis I say I really *was* a ghost > >> then. > > > >Reminds me a bit of some of my past OBEs when I would feel exuberantly > >silly and leap out the window just to jump in front of cars in the > >driveway of the OBE version of my neighborhood pretending to be a ghost > >so I could see the drivers' startled reactions. :) > > That was YOU?! Damned near gave me a heart attack! Hey, that's a private drive, you know. You had no business being there late at night! -- http://sites.netscape.net/jvogelsong/ ###### From: Haunter@castles.com (Haunter) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 11:33:59 GMT Organization: A.S.I./Psi -App/WCS Lines: 19 Message-ID: <39fbf2f3.321382117@cnews.newsguy.com> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <39E4B384.38CE@not-here.net> <39E5EB0D.435E133F@algonet.se> <39E68108.4C29@not-here.net> <39f48ed1.295744178@cnews.newsguy.com> <39E6E9CC.6120@not-here.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: p-404.newsdawg.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.452 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!enews.sgi.com!pln-w!spln!dex!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!enews2 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54512 On Fri, 13 Oct 2000 10:48:43 GMT, Janice wrote: >> >Reminds me a bit of some of my past OBEs when I would feel exuberantly >> >silly and leap out the window just to jump in front of cars in the >> >driveway of the OBE version of my neighborhood pretending to be a ghost >> >so I could see the drivers' startled reactions. :) >> >> That was YOU?! Damned near gave me a heart attack! > >Hey, that's a private drive, you know. You had no business being there >late at night! Well jeez, least you could do is put up an "OBE Crossing" sign for all us wayward tourists! :))) -- Knowledge is the Antidote for Fear http://www.whitecrowsociety.com http://www.legendsmagazine.net/pan/rayn/rpm ###### From: Gunnar Ljungstrand Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 19:28:15 +0200 Organization: Telenordia Lines: 38 Message-ID: <39E7462F.EAEE5F45@algonet.se> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> <39E5EB04.9BF0D2FB@algonet.se> <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net> Reply-To: dervak@algonet.se NNTP-Posting-Host: du211-27.ppp.algonet.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: zingo.tninet.se 971458090 2327 195.100.27.211 (13 Oct 2000 17:28:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@algo.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 13 Oct 2000 17:28:10 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: sv,en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!machtgarnix.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!diablo.netcom.net.uk!netcom.net.uk!newsfeed1.bredband.net!bredband!newsfeed1.telenordia.se!algonet!pepsi.tninet.se!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54397 Hi Janice, Janice wrote: > Not all of them have been associated with REM, but they have been in > some lab research, including when Haunter was looking into them way > back when. Ok. > Yep - there is that, and Trish and I have both noticed something of an > imperative to move around even if we keep local. Interesting. > My guess would be that it's because you're in an anomalous state > during them, with your brain chemistry closer to what it is like > during an alert waking state than is usual during REM, so there will > tend to be a tug towards wakefulness. The neurotransmitters that are > supposedly required to sustain critical attention, rational thought > and memory storage functions are normally in very low supply during > REM, but they are probably around in some quantity to support the > increased awareness that is reported in the case of lucid dreams, and, > unfortunately for the lucid dreamer who'd like to prolong the state, > that would increase the chances of waking up altogether. I see. It is certainly possible. (But I still think OBEs are at least as "real" as any neurotransmitters or brain... ;-) See you out there... /Gunnar --------------------- - Question Authority! - Yeah, Says Who? --------------------- ###### From: Gunnar Ljungstrand Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 19:28:29 +0200 Organization: Telenordia Lines: 54 Message-ID: <39E7463D.9B3407B7@algonet.se> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <39E4B384.38CE@not-here.net> <39E5EB0D.435E133F@algonet.se> <39E68108.4C29@not-here.net> Reply-To: dervak@algonet.se NNTP-Posting-Host: du211-27.ppp.algonet.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: zingo.tninet.se 971458103 2327 195.100.27.211 (13 Oct 2000 17:28:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@algo.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 13 Oct 2000 17:28:23 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: sv,en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!machtgarnix.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!news.tele.dk!194.213.69.151!news.algonet.se!newsfeed1.telenordia.se!algonet!pepsi.tninet.se!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54391 Hi Janice, Janice wrote: > If that had happened to me, I would have concluded after I woke up > that because the scene looked so realistic and normal, I more or less > convinced myself in the OBE that I was literally disembodied in the > physical world, and that the effect with the books and the character's > startled reaction simply followed from that assumption. Could be. But then again I never had much luck in changing the environment to suit my wishes. This time it simply *was* different, and I no more think I caused it to be thus than I think the sun rises every morning *because* I expect it to. > *Dreamers* in the astral act like zombies? I thought that was the > thought-forms. I'll never get all this straight. ;) Yeah, in a way you are right. Let me clarify: In my experience dreamers are the most common people you meet "out there". Their lucidness varies but generally they aren´t very aware (don´t seem to notice me, don´t answer when spoken to, don´t show any initiative), and generally resemble zombies in their manner. Some dreamers are more lucid and may answer questions, but still show little initiative. As to how I know they are dreamers - of course I don´t *know* it, but that is what they say when asked (the ones that do answer). Thoughtforms seem to be more rare, but have a distinctive mannequin-like character, or if moving repeating the same movements over and over again. But I haven´t seen many. Almost all really lucid people you meet are discarnates (deceased) - again, this is what they claim when asked. Other OBEers are rare (there doesn´t seem to be that many of us). > Reminds me a bit of some of my past OBEs when I would feel exuberantly > silly and leap out the window just to jump in front of cars in the > driveway of the OBE version of my neighborhood pretending to be a > ghost so I could see the drivers' startled reactions. :) I did that once too. I let a car drive thru me just for the hell of it, and to watch the driver´s reaction, if any. See you out there... /Gunnar --------------------- - Question Authority! - Yeah, Says Who? --------------------- ###### From: Sherilyn <582@sherilyn.co.uk> Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: 13 Oct 2000 16:40:47 -0700 Organization: Extra Newsguy News Service [http://extra.newsguy.com] Lines: 23 Message-ID: <8s86hv09a1@edrn.newsguy.com> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> <39E5EB04.9BF0D2FB@algonet.se> <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net> <8ytF5.5029$yH1.248284@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net> <39E672A5.673A@not-here.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: p-668.newsdawg.com Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!newsfeed.stanford.edu!pln-w!spln!dex!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!edrn Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54443 In article <39E672A5.673A@not-here.net>, Janice says... > >capuchin wrote: >> [...] >> >> Hmmm. Thanks for that inclusion. I hadn't considered that. And if we >> continue to move and stay engaged in the OBE/LD environment, we >> can keep from waking up. > >That's the tried and true way of prolonging a fading LD, though of >course there eventually comes a point where you're just too awake even >for that to work. > >> Like a balancing act. Can't get too involved ... but can't be uninvolved >> either. > >Yes. If you just stand around thinking, the dream will tend to fade; >but you have to do some critical thinking, or you'll slip into >nonlucidity. Catch-22! ;) ###### Message-ID: <39E9454E.17DC@not-here.net> From: Janice X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> <39E5EB04.9BF0D2FB@algonet.se> <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net> <39E7462F.EAEE5F45@algonet.se> <39E7D077.159@not-here.net> <39E83D26.932E975@algonet.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 22 NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 00:46:02 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv2-jf8FaAIeCylgnjjfE2Lq66aGewIbh/+dUEKDFzBxFrsCS2JDSl0sX69KqyMukhUg2Ge/2v1lObM45wj!CgsnSkkXXTUTKK6PsqmOtGi5nAo= X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 05:46:02 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!machtgarnix.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!xfer13.netnews.com!netnews.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!news-peer.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!nntp2.aus1.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news1.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54678 Gunnar Ljungstrand wrote: > > Hi Janice, > > Janice wrote: > > > > (But I still think OBEs are at least as > > > "real" as any neurotransmitters or brain... ;-) > > > > Too bad the neurotransmitters always win in the end. :) > > Yeah, Says Who??? ;-) So your goal is to remain permanently in the OBE state? Hey, maybe you could learn to switch your focus to that state at will at any time. Just close your eyes and be flying.... :) (Disclaimer: I don't really think this would be possible but it's an entertaining idea.) -- http://sites.netscape.net/jvogelsong/ ###### Message-ID: <39E967B7.E6A@not-here.net> From: Janice X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <39E4B384.38CE@not-here.net> <39E5EB0D.435E133F@algonet.se> <39E68108.4C29@not-here.net> <39E7463D.9B3407B7@algonet.se> <39E7D19E.63CD@not-here.net> <39E83D31.AE5C6787@algonet.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 21 NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 03:12:26 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv2-gemIFQ0hCtr9nCKP9IJXIp08jF14aLE7kibt1v+9X9jjQ93G9BloEwB5ITNSJrYJiLuD9m9hhynG41L!dHzsasfWBKQnlgvIyN6miYecF9s= X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 04:15:51 -0400 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!hermes.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!nntp2.aus1.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news6.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54666 Gunnar Ljungstrand wrote: > Janice wrote: > > > So what are the people like in your nonlucid dreams? On the whole the > > people seem more normal in my nonlucid dreams than they do in my lucid > > dreams/OBEs. > > Hard to say. My general impression is that people there act *fairly* > normally, or in any case I don´t notice much oddities *during* the > dream. Afterwards is another thing. Yes, I've had a number of incidents in which characters in nonlucid dreams will flip back and forth between looking like normal people and looking like grinning, grimacing impish things. I gloss right over this in the dream but then wake up and realize how bizarre it is - like demons struggling to maintain human form. (Now I've probably gone and scared Lorene. :) -- http://sites.netscape.net/jvogelsong/ ###### From: Gunnar Ljungstrand Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 11:03:43 +0200 Organization: Telenordia Lines: 44 Message-ID: <39E972EF.48B11AD@algonet.se> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> <39E5EB04.9BF0D2FB@algonet.se> <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net> <39E7462F.EAEE5F45@algonet.se> <39E7D077.159@not-here.net> <39E83D26.932E975@algonet.se> <39E9454E.17DC@not-here.net> Reply-To: dervak@algonet.se NNTP-Posting-Host: du112-27.ppp.algonet.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: zingo.tninet.se 971600621 7084 195.100.27.112 (15 Oct 2000 09:03:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@algo.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 15 Oct 2000 09:03:41 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: sv,en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!news.tele.dk!194.213.69.151!news.algonet.se!newsfeed1.telenordia.se!algonet!pepsi.tninet.se!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54686 Hi Janice, Janice wrote: > So your goal is to remain permanently in the OBE state? Hey, maybe > you could learn to switch your focus to that state at will at any > time. Just close your eyes and be flying.... :) Hmm... that´s not exactly what I meant. What I wanted to say that OBEs or dreams coming to premature ends *because of imbalance of some kinds of neurotransmitters* is merely *a hypothesis*. I am continually amazed with so many people seeming to take scientific *models* as established fact (whatever *that* is BTW). I mean, even if you do find a strong correlation - and I don´t even know if that´s the case - that does not necessarily imply causation. If A and B are correlated it might not be that A is causing B, B might be causing A, or the unknown factor C could be causing both A and B. So, what I´m saying is that if you find a certain number of a particular kind of neurotransmitters in the brain during, say, REM sleep, and a different number during wakefulness, it need not be that a decrease in the number causes someone to wake up, it might be that waking up *causes* the decrease, or that the decrease and the waking up are caused by a 3rd unknown factor. As for staying "out" for a long time, or even permanently wouldn´t be such a bad thing - while "out" I certainly wouldn´t say no, waking-life things seem so unimportant then... ;-) Then again, I guess that will come in its own due time, as it will for everyone, so no need to hurry... Doing it at will would be extremely fun tho, but I´m not sure if it is possible. See you out there... /Gunnar --------------------- - Question Authority! - Yeah, Says Who? --------------------- ###### From: Gunnar Ljungstrand Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 11:04:04 +0200 Organization: Telenordia Lines: 32 Message-ID: <39E97304.6CED9330@algonet.se> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <39E4B384.38CE@not-here.net> <39E5EB0D.435E133F@algonet.se> <39E68108.4C29@not-here.net> <39E7463D.9B3407B7@algonet.se> <39E7D19E.63CD@not-here.net> <39E83D31.AE5C6787@algonet.se> <39E967B7.E6A@not-here.net> Reply-To: dervak@algonet.se NNTP-Posting-Host: du112-27.ppp.algonet.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: zingo.tninet.se 971600639 7084 195.100.27.112 (15 Oct 2000 09:03:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@algo.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 15 Oct 2000 09:03:59 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: sv,en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!news.tele.dk!194.213.69.151!news.algonet.se!newsfeed1.telenordia.se!algonet!pepsi.tninet.se!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54687 Hi Janice, Janice wrote: > Yes, I've had a number of incidents in which characters in nonlucid > dreams will flip back and forth between looking like normal people and > looking like grinning, grimacing impish things. Cool! :-D I can´t remember having that sort of thing. > I gloss right over this in the dream but then wake up and realize how > bizarre it is - like demons struggling to maintain human form. (Now > I've probably gone and scared Lorene. :) Bad Janice! ;-) Go scare PZ instead (not that I know what would be a nightmare for him - perhaps a dream in which he has turned "woo-woo", a starry-eyed, naïve, uncritical, incense-burning, UFO-gazing, crystal-collecting PZ - now *that* would be something to see! Hahahah!!!) See you out there... /Gunnar --------------------- - Question Authority! - Yeah, Says Who? --------------------- ###### From: Sherilyn <582@sherilyn.co.uk> Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: 15 Oct 2000 07:33:04 -0700 Organization: Extra Newsguy News Service [http://extra.newsguy.com] Lines: 26 Message-ID: <8scf700bav@edrn.newsguy.com> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> <39E5EB04.9BF0D2FB@algonet.se> <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net> <39E7462F.EAEE5F45@algonet.se> <39E7D077.159@not-here.net> <39E83D26.932E975@algonet.se> <39E9454E.17DC@not-here.net> <39E972EF.48B11AD@algonet.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: p-430.newsdawg.com Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!enews.sgi.com!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!pln-w!spln!dex!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!edrn Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54700 In article <39E972EF.48B11AD@algonet.se>, Gunnar says... [...] > What I wanted to say that OBEs >or dreams coming to premature ends *because of imbalance of some kinds >of neurotransmitters* is merely *a hypothesis*. I am continually amazed >with so many people seeming to take scientific *models* as established >fact (whatever *that* is BTW). > >I mean, even if you do find a strong correlation - and I don´t even know >if that´s the case - that does not necessarily imply causation. If A and >B are correlated it might not be that A is causing B, B might be causing >A, or the unknown factor C could be causing both A and B. > >So, what I´m saying is that if you find a certain number of a particular >kind of neurotransmitters in the brain during, say, REM sleep, and a >different number during wakefulness, it need not be that a decrease in >the number causes someone to wake up, it might be that waking up >*causes* the decrease, or that the decrease and the waking up are caused >by a 3rd unknown factor. > Do you agree that if it were shown to be possible to induce and control a lucid dream by controlling the numbers of neurotransmitters, this would establish a causal link? [...] ###### Message-ID: <39E9E522.6F02@not-here.net> From: Janice X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> <39E5EB04.9BF0D2FB@algonet.se> <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net> <39E7462F.EAEE5F45@algonet.se> <39E7D077.159@not-here.net> <39E83D26.932E975@algonet.se> <39E9454E.17DC@not-here.net> <39E972EF.48B11AD@algonet.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 71 NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 12:05:32 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv2-gi7fozL3rn5QCddOzHCzW7si9e+e9F+Ej50fNiFWRjROJuSaAE83Oef7Kf92A31ypQtGXU+Jjxueg7D!MF39KknTEhngEMImQaPZozdu7fg= X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 17:05:32 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!HSNX.atgi.net!novia!nntp2.aus1.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news2.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54671 Gunnar Ljungstrand wrote: > > Hi Janice, > > Janice wrote: > > > So your goal is to remain permanently in the OBE state? Hey, maybe > > you could learn to switch your focus to that state at will at any > > time. Just close your eyes and be flying.... :) > > Hmm... that´s not exactly what I meant. What I wanted to say that OBEs > or dreams coming to premature ends *because of imbalance of some kinds > of neurotransmitters* is merely *a hypothesis*. I am continually amazed > with so many people seeming to take scientific *models* as established > fact (whatever *that* is BTW). Hey, I said that it was my guess. :) Anyone sensible doesn't take scientific models as established fact; the models are always open to revision and even to being abandoned. The models are, however, well-thought-out extrapolations from established facts, and one can make further extrapolations from the models to come up with plausible explanations for specific phenomena, preferably explanations that can be tested. > I mean, even if you do find a strong correlation - and I don´t even know > if that´s the case - that does not necessarily imply causation. If A and > B are correlated it might not be that A is causing B, B might be causing > A, or the unknown factor C could be causing both A and B. > > So, what I´m saying is that if you find a certain number of a particular > kind of neurotransmitters in the brain during, say, REM sleep, and a > different number during wakefulness, it need not be that a decrease in > the number causes someone to wake up, it might be that waking up > *causes* the decrease, or that the decrease and the waking up are caused > by a 3rd unknown factor. Actually it's an increase (in the amount of aminergic neurotransmitters) that correlates with waking. But in the case of changing back and forth between sleeping and waking, you really can have it both ways to a point. The process is brainstem-modulated, and therefore largely automated, but the wiring between the brainstem and the cortex is two-way, so the cortex has some influence over the matter. Otherwise we would never be able to force ourselves to stay awake, to make a conscious decision to sustain waking consciousness a while longer. Nor could we wake ourselves up from bad dreams. If you (or anyone here) would be interested in reading far more technical descriptions of these matters than I'm capable of writing, take a look here (beware - it will take a long time to load with the average modem): http://home.earthlink.net/~sleeplab/bbs/BBS.html > As for staying "out" for a long time, or even permanently wouldn´t be > such a bad thing - while "out" I certainly wouldn´t say no, waking-life > things seem so unimportant then... ;-) Then again, I guess that will > come in its own due time, as it will for everyone, so no need to > hurry... > > Doing it at will would be extremely fun tho, but I´m not sure if it is > possible. Me neither. It was just an entertaining idea. On the other hand some people do seem to be able to get into their daydreams with a high degree of absorption so maybe that could have pretty much the same effect. -- http://sites.netscape.net/jvogelsong/ ###### From: Gunnar Ljungstrand Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:04:09 +0200 Organization: Telenordia Lines: 77 Message-ID: <39EB26F9.AE7AD2A1@algonet.se> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> <39E5EB04.9BF0D2FB@algonet.se> <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net> <39E7462F.EAEE5F45@algonet.se> <39E7D077.159@not-here.net> <39E83D26.932E975@algonet.se> <39E9454E.17DC@not-here.net> <39E972EF.48B11AD@algonet.se> <39E9E522.6F02@not-here.net> Reply-To: dervak@algonet.se NNTP-Posting-Host: du14-91.ppp.algonet.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: zingo.tninet.se 971712247 22607 195.100.91.14 (16 Oct 2000 16:04:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@algo.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 Oct 2000 16:04:07 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: sv,en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!bignews.mediaways.net!news.algonet.se!newsfeed1.telenordia.se!algonet!pepsi.tninet.se!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54916 Hi Janice, Janice wrote: > Anyone sensible doesn't take scientific models as established fact; Indeed not. The critical word being "sensible"... ;-) > the models are always open to revision and even to being abandoned. > The models are, however, well-thought-out extrapolations from > established facts, For the most part, yes. They are, however, usually limited by implicit unproved assumptions. E.g. most scientific hypotheses regarding the brain *assume*, as if that was self-evident, that consciousness is a product of, an epiphenomenon of, the physical brain. Dreams for instance are almost universally thought of as products of the brain, *because for those people that is the only option*. From the evidence it is just as possible that the brain (and by extension everything perceived) is created by the consciousness, as the other way around. > and one can make further extrapolations from the models to come up > with plausible explanations for specific phenomena, preferably > explanations that can be tested. Yes. That is all good so far, but extrapolations don´t always apply. Furthermore, you must not be blind to the bias that the prevailing paradigm imposes to you. > Actually it's an increase (in the amount of aminergic > neurotransmitters) that correlates with waking. Ok. Substitute "increase" for "decrease" then. :-) > But in the case of changing back and forth between sleeping and > waking, you really can have it both ways to a point. The process is > brainstem-modulated, and therefore largely automated, but the wiring > between the brainstem and the cortex is two-way, so the cortex has > some influence over the matter. Otherwise we would never be able to > force ourselves to stay awake, to make a conscious decision to sustain > waking consciousness a while longer. Nor could we wake ourselves up > from bad dreams. Ok. I´m certainly not denying the physical brain-side of things. However, I don´t think it is all, or even the most important. > If you (or anyone here) would be interested in reading far more > technical descriptions of these matters than I'm capable of writing, > take a look here (beware - it will take a long time to load with the > average modem): > > http://home.earthlink.net/~sleeplab/bbs/BBS.html Might have a look at it. > Me neither. It was just an entertaining idea. On the other hand some > people do seem to be able to get into their daydreams with a high > degree of absorption so maybe that could have pretty much the same > effect. At least for me, daydreams are vastly more inferior than even common dreams, much less LDs or OBEs. When I "daydream" I am merely absorbed into some thought pattern or scenario - I never "see" or "hear" things. See you out there... /Gunnar --------------------- - Question Authority! - Yeah, Says Who? --------------------- ###### Message-ID: <39ECAD02.23E8@not-here.net> From: Janice X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> <39E5EB04.9BF0D2FB@algonet.se> <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net> <39E7462F.EAEE5F45@algonet.se> <39E7D077.159@not-here.net> <39E83D26.932E975@algonet.se> <39E9454E.17DC@not-here.net> <39E972EF.48B11AD@algonet.se> <39E9E522.6F02@not-here.net> <39EB26F9.AE7AD2A1@algonet.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 64 NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 14:44:52 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv2-qKee9qB3UycftBWqCyU3kxpTl3XgAcn+R97syVppo2C/isDTxYIfXLJ0vLhU32NU1+3GFap1RKngLxQ!y/3naUIlDaRR4aOfQtCsMbFTsQk= X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 19:44:52 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.tele.dk!209.50.235.254!europa.netcrusader.net!207.172.3.37!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news1.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:54880 Gunnar Ljungstrand wrote: > Janice wrote: > > > the models are always open to revision and even to being abandoned. > > The models are, however, well-thought-out extrapolations from > > established facts, > > For the most part, yes. They are, however, usually limited by implicit > unproved assumptions. > > E.g. most scientific hypotheses regarding the brain *assume*, as if that > was self-evident, that consciousness is a product of, an epiphenomenon > of, the physical brain. Dreams for instance are almost universally > thought of as products of the brain, *because for those people that is > the only option*. Not necessarily. It may simply be the most reasonable and defensible option. Only when a lot of contradictory evidence comes up would it be considered necessary to give more than cursory attention to other ideas, but that doesn't mean that those other ideas haven't been kept in mind all along. > From the evidence it is just as possible that the brain (and by > extension everything perceived) is created by the consciousness, as the > other way around. > > > and one can make further extrapolations from the models to come up > > with plausible explanations for specific phenomena, preferably > > explanations that can be tested. > > Yes. That is all good so far, but extrapolations don´t always apply. > Furthermore, you must not be blind to the bias that the prevailing > paradigm imposes to you. Very true. > > If you (or anyone here) would be interested in reading far more > > technical descriptions of these matters than I'm capable of writing, > > take a look here (beware - it will take a long time to load with the > > average modem): > > > > http://home.earthlink.net/~sleeplab/bbs/BBS.html > > Might have a look at it. It's extremely long - 222 pages or so in the PDF version. I ended up having to download it and save it for later reading. I'll keep looking for a shorter version that won't put the non-specialist to sleep. :) > > Me neither. It was just an entertaining idea. On the other hand some > > people do seem to be able to get into their daydreams with a high > > degree of absorption so maybe that could have pretty much the same > > effect. > > At least for me, daydreams are vastly more inferior than even common > dreams, much less LDs or OBEs. When I "daydream" I am merely absorbed > into some thought pattern or scenario - I never "see" or "hear" things. It's the same way for me, but I've heard that for some people a daydream can be every bit as engaging as a regular dream. -- http://sites.netscape.net/jvogelsong/ ###### From: Gunnar Ljungstrand Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 18:59:02 +0200 Organization: Telenordia Lines: 82 Message-ID: <39EDD6D6.C7F5605E@algonet.se> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> <39E5EB04.9BF0D2FB@algonet.se> <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net> <39E7462F.EAEE5F45@algonet.se> <39E7D077.159@not-here.net> <39E83D26.932E975@algonet.se> <39E9454E.17DC@not-here.net> <39E972EF.48B11AD@algonet.se> <39E9E522.6F02@not-here.net> <39EB26F9.AE7AD2A1@algonet.se> <39ECAD02.23E8@not-here.net> Reply-To: dervak@algonet.se NNTP-Posting-Host: sdu195-239.ppp.algonet.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: zingo.tninet.se 971888340 21644 195.163.239.195 (18 Oct 2000 16:59:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@algo.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 18 Oct 2000 16:59:00 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: sv,en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!isdnet!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!colt.net!newspeer.highwayone.net!newsfeed1.telenordia.se!algonet!pepsi.tninet.se!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:55146 Hi Janice, Janice wrote: > Not necessarily. It may simply be the most reasonable and defensible > option. As seen from the prevailing paradigm and presupposing the generally accepted axioms, yes. > Only when a lot of contradictory evidence comes up would it be > considered necessary to give more than cursory attention to other > ideas, but that doesn't mean that those other ideas haven't been kept > in mind all along. I´ll accept that there probably are many scientists who think like you describe, but IMO most seem not to. And it need not be about "paranormal" stuff either. In theory scientists should examine the evidence and different hypotheses fairly and objectively, ditching even a pet theory when evidence demands it. Of course this seldom happens, because scientists are human, with human emotions and fallacies. Consider what you would do if you had studied some field for, say, 30 years. You are respected among your peers, have a lot of authority and prestige, and have personally developed and refined the current theory. Then new evidence appears contradicting your theory, or a simpler, more elegant hypothesis is proposed, one which explains the evidence as good, or better. What would you do, honestly? Admit that you have been wrong for 30 years and basically wasted your entire academic career on something which is in the end incorrect? A few people might do it, but not many I think. Most would resist the new with all their might, use all their power and influence to attack and ridicule the new, putting obstacles in the way of anyone supporting it. Some (only a few, I hope) might even falsify results to support their side. It is said that a new scientific paradigm is never accepted by the "old guard", only after that they have died away. Consider "continental drift" (plate tectonics) for instance. When the german scientist A. Wegener in 1915 proposed that the continents had been continuous before, but since had drifted apart, he was vehemently attacked by the established geologists, including attacks against his character. In part this was because he was an outsider, a meteorologist by profession, who dared to trespass on the sacred ground of the geologists. There were more valid reasons too; at that time no one could think of any mechanism by which this might work, the energy requirements were too astounding. However, even then there were a lot of evidence supporting the theory. Not only the similarity of coastlines (or even more so, coastal shelves), but similar types of rock in the adjoining lands and similar fossils. The earlier, old-guard theories (geosynclines, land bridges etc.) were very weak by comparison. So Wegener was attacked, ridiculed, and ostracized. This marked him, but he continued with his research, disappearing in Greenland in 1930. Plate tectonics became accepted as late as the 1960s. This was partly due to new evidence (earthquake foci, ocean ridges, paleomagnetic data etc.), and partly due to new, refined models, but also because by then the old guard had passed away. > It's the same way for me, but I've heard that for some people a > daydream can be every bit as engaging as a regular dream. Arrgh! I envy them. See you out there... /Gunnar --------------------- - Question Authority! - Yeah, Says Who? --------------------- ###### From: "Lars Foleide" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 21:02:37 +0200 Organization: UNINETT news service Lines: 61 Message-ID: <8sksii$nh7$1@snipp.uninett.no> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> <39E5EB04.9BF0D2FB@algonet.se> <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net> <8ytF5.5029$yH1.248284@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net> <39E672A5.673A@not-here.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 158.38.79.117 X-Trace: snipp.uninett.no 971896210 24103 158.38.79.117 (18 Oct 2000 19:10:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news-abuse@uninett.no X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news-fra1.dfn.de!news-fra.pop.de!newscore.gigabell.net!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fr.clara.net!small.fr.clara.net!news.tele.dk!128.39.3.166!uninett.no!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:55204 Janice wrote in message news:39E672A5.673A@not-here.net... > > >> > > >> Sure, but why does the state of my brain change then? Why are OBEs and > > >> LDs (usually) so unstable and short? > > > > > >My guess would be that it's because you're in an anomalous state during > > >them, with your brain chemistry closer to what it is like during an > > >alert waking state than is usual during REM, so there will tend to be a > > >tug towards wakefulness. The neurotransmitters that are supposedly > > >required to sustain critical attention, rational thought and memory > > >storage functions are normally in very low supply during REM, but they > > >are probably around in some quantity to support the increased awareness > > >that is reported in the case of lucid dreams, and, unfortunately for the > > >lucid dreamer who'd like to prolong the state, that would increase the > > >chances of waking up altogether. > > > > Hmmm. Thanks for that inclusion. I hadn't considered that. And if we > > continue to move and stay engaged in the OBE/LD environment, we > > can keep from waking up. > > That's the tried and true way of prolonging a fading LD, though of > course there eventually comes a point where you're just too awake even > for that to work. > > > Like a balancing act. Can't get too involved ... but can't be uninvolved > > either. > > Yes. If you just stand around thinking, the dream will tend to fade; > but you have to do some critical thinking, or you'll slip into > nonlucidity. I would have to disagree with this, you don't necessarily wake up because you think rational, logical and has a very lucid and clear mind. Of course, it requires practice to get become good at it. But I would say it is drawing the wrong conclusions if you are afraid of thinking in the same way you do in Norway awake state just because you might wake up. You get more control and it becomes more real to you if you clam down and think about what you did yesterday, what your intention is, do some simple math, and make sure that you truly are awake within your dream state. One get much better lucid dreams and OBEs by doing this. And I'm also willing to say that things can be superreal in a LD/OBE. That green is more green than usual, smells are stronger and you hear better. But the reason for this could just be that you are more aware of your surroundings than normal. I think Ian Wilson also valued critical thinking when he became lucid, and had many advises for what you could do once you get lucid: http://www.geocitices.com/lucidmetro Regards, Lars ###### Message-ID: <39EE6FEA.5B0B@not-here.net> From: Janice X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> <39E5EB04.9BF0D2FB@algonet.se> <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net> <8ytF5.5029$yH1.248284@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net> <39E672A5.673A@not-here.net> <8sksii$nh7$1@snipp.uninett.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 74 NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:46:32 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv2-lVywFoLoqpMDuL8p5HBnsGa9VkmHZJ/0QdrCB2UX6AHMjdWiZ+wSbeHmLYHnaNmElpvEBjWngcpwojT!YqP8MAwdVtmjrUAY4skZ2zYaLR4= X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 03:46:32 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news-stu1.dfn.de!news-koe1.dfn.de!RRZ.Uni-Koeln.DE!news.netcologne.de!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!hermes.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!nntp.flash.net!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news2.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:55143 Lars Foleide wrote: > > Janice wrote in message > news:39E672A5.673A@not-here.net... > > > >> > > > >> Sure, but why does the state of my brain change then? Why are OBEs > and > > > >> LDs (usually) so unstable and short? > > > > > > > >My guess would be that it's because you're in an anomalous state during > > > >them, with your brain chemistry closer to what it is like during an > > > >alert waking state than is usual during REM, so there will tend to be a > > > >tug towards wakefulness. The neurotransmitters that are supposedly > > > >required to sustain critical attention, rational thought and memory > > > >storage functions are normally in very low supply during REM, but they > > > >are probably around in some quantity to support the increased awareness > > > >that is reported in the case of lucid dreams, and, unfortunately for > the > > > >lucid dreamer who'd like to prolong the state, that would increase the > > > >chances of waking up altogether. > > > > > > Hmmm. Thanks for that inclusion. I hadn't considered that. And if we > > > continue to move and stay engaged in the OBE/LD environment, we > > > can keep from waking up. > > > > That's the tried and true way of prolonging a fading LD, though of > > course there eventually comes a point where you're just too awake even > > for that to work. > > > > > Like a balancing act. Can't get too involved ... but can't be > uninvolved > > > either. > > > > Yes. If you just stand around thinking, the dream will tend to fade; > > but you have to do some critical thinking, or you'll slip into > > nonlucidity. > > I would have to disagree with this, you don't necessarily wake up because > you think rational, logical and has a very lucid and clear mind. Thinking clearly in the dream is not the problem. The problem is doing nothing *but* thinking. My lucid dreaming friends and I have commonly (but not invariably) experienced a fading of the visuals when we concentrate heavily on a mental task such as reciting poetry in a dream, or if we just observe and think about what's going on without "physically" participating in the action. > Of course, it requires practice to get become good at it. > But I would say it is drawing the wrong conclusions if you are afraid of > thinking in the same way you do in Norway awake state just because > you might wake up. > You get more control and it becomes more real to you if you clam down and > think about what you did yesterday, what your intention is, do some simple > math, and make sure that you truly are awake within your dream state. > One get much better lucid dreams and OBEs by doing this. Yes, I agree with that. The dream can hardly be called "lucid" unless the dreamer is capable of doing some clear thinking at the time. > And I'm also willing to say that things can be superreal in a LD/OBE. That > green is more green than usual, smells are stronger and you hear better. > But the reason for this could just be that you are more aware of your > surroundings than normal. > > I think Ian Wilson also valued critical thinking when he became lucid, and > had many advises for what you could do once you get lucid: > http://www.geocitices.com/lucidmetro I have his course downloaded, and plan to read through it one of these days. -- http://sites.netscape.net/jvogelsong/ ###### Message-ID: <39EE716B.285C@not-here.net> From: Janice X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> <39E5EB04.9BF0D2FB@algonet.se> <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net> <8ytF5.5029$yH1.248284@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net> <39E672A5.673A@not-here.net> <8sksii$nh7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39EE6FEA.5B0B@not-here.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 54 NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:52:57 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv2-cRp7UYViIbQEPjEo6N2bSNnp7IaxcwjviOKrVp85fEhwojpz0iPpK8dIQlOZt72PboE9Ct5xRmpAwhh!LBO1Qyp8dJhAs31PLh3u4cRSVIU= X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 03:52:58 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!nntp2.aus1.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news2.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:55127 Janice wrote: > > Lars Foleide wrote: > > > > Janice wrote in message > > news:39E672A5.673A@not-here.net... > > > > >> > > > > >> Sure, but why does the state of my brain change then? Why are OBEs > > and > > > > >> LDs (usually) so unstable and short? > > > > > > > > > >My guess would be that it's because you're in an anomalous state during > > > > >them, with your brain chemistry closer to what it is like during an > > > > >alert waking state than is usual during REM, so there will tend to be a > > > > >tug towards wakefulness. The neurotransmitters that are supposedly > > > > >required to sustain critical attention, rational thought and memory > > > > >storage functions are normally in very low supply during REM, but they > > > > >are probably around in some quantity to support the increased awareness > > > > >that is reported in the case of lucid dreams, and, unfortunately for > > the > > > > >lucid dreamer who'd like to prolong the state, that would increase the > > > > >chances of waking up altogether. > > > > > > > > Hmmm. Thanks for that inclusion. I hadn't considered that. And if we > > > > continue to move and stay engaged in the OBE/LD environment, we > > > > can keep from waking up. > > > > > > That's the tried and true way of prolonging a fading LD, though of > > > course there eventually comes a point where you're just too awake even > > > for that to work. > > > > > > > Like a balancing act. Can't get too involved ... but can't be > > uninvolved > > > > either. > > > > > > Yes. If you just stand around thinking, the dream will tend to fade; > > > but you have to do some critical thinking, or you'll slip into > > > nonlucidity. > > > > I would have to disagree with this, you don't necessarily wake up because > > you think rational, logical and has a very lucid and clear mind. > > Thinking clearly in the dream is not the problem. The problem is doing > nothing *but* thinking. My lucid dreaming friends and I have commonly > (but not invariably) experienced a fading of the visuals when we > concentrate heavily on a mental task such as reciting poetry in a dream, > or if we just observe and think about what's going on without > "physically" participating in the action. Though we didn't find the latter (just observing without participating) nearly as challenging as Stephen LaBerge apparently did. -- http://sites.netscape.net/jvogelsong/ ###### Message-ID: <39EEEEF8.3298@not-here.net> From: Janice X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <39E4B384.38CE@not-here.net> <39E5EB0D.435E133F@algonet.se> <39E68108.4C29@not-here.net> <39E7463D.9B3407B7@algonet.se> <39E7D19E.63CD@not-here.net> <39E83D31.AE5C6787@algonet.se> <39E967B7.E6A@not-here.net> <39E97304.6CED9330@algonet.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 37 NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 07:48:36 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv2-zEJGk3NjWKUd2jlJ7uaNZ14+6r/x+DKa6h60jR37ILkV/4lx5rpCGxFfZSpGzW3wO33NRMjpcNM/L7Y!X0z44dwKxqeyimq8kcjfZtcVsHU= X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:48:36 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp.flash.net!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news2.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:55138 Gunnar Ljungstrand wrote: > > Hi Janice, > > Janice wrote: > > > Yes, I've had a number of incidents in which characters in nonlucid > > dreams will flip back and forth between looking like normal people and > > looking like grinning, grimacing impish things. > > Cool! :-D > > I can´t remember having that sort of thing. It happens in lucid dreams too, only then I actually register it at the time. Most recently it happened with a character that looked like my mother. She/it clung to me tightly when I realized what was going on and tried to leave, so I pried off the hands and very gently wrapped the arms together like pretzels to slow it down a bit then made my exit. I think it's Jay's fault - he loves making goofy faces at me. :) > > I gloss right over this in the dream but then wake up and realize how > > bizarre it is - like demons struggling to maintain human form. (Now > > I've probably gone and scared Lorene. :) > > Bad Janice! ;-) > > Go scare PZ instead (not that I know what would be a nightmare for him - > perhaps a dream in which he has turned "woo-woo", a starry-eyed, naïve, > uncritical, incense-burning, UFO-gazing, crystal-collecting PZ - now > *that* would be something to see! Hahahah!!!) That might do it. -- http://sites.netscape.net/jvogelsong/ ###### From: "Lars Foleide" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 19:30:14 +0200 Organization: UNINETT news service Lines: 34 Message-ID: <8t1sgi$a9u$1@snipp.uninett.no> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <39E4C380.566D@not-here.net> <39E5EB04.9BF0D2FB@algonet.se> <39E61DD2.41DF@not-here.net> <8ytF5.5029$yH1.248284@paloalto-snr1.gtei.net> <39E672A5.673A@not-here.net> <8sksii$nh7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39EE6FEA.5B0B@not-here.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 158.38.79.117 X-Trace: snipp.uninett.no 972322130 10558 158.38.79.117 (23 Oct 2000 17:28:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news-abuse@uninett.no X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news-stu1.dfn.de!news-koe1.dfn.de!RRZ.Uni-Koeln.DE!news.netcologne.de!news.tele.dk!128.39.3.166!uninett.no!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:55838 Janice wrote in message news:39EE6FEA.5B0B@not-here.net... > > > > I would have to disagree with this, you don't necessarily wake up because > > you think rational, logical and has a very lucid and clear mind. > > Thinking clearly in the dream is not the problem. The problem is doing > nothing *but* thinking. My lucid dreaming friends and I have commonly > (but not invariably) experienced a fading of the visuals when we > concentrate heavily on a mental task such as reciting poetry in a dream, > or if we just observe and think about what's going on without > "physically" participating in the action. > Not that I understand the point of having a visual virtual world around you when you think in words. > > I think Ian Wilson also valued critical thinking when he became lucid, and > > had many advises for what you could do once you get lucid: > > http://www.geocitices.com/lucidmetro > > I have his course downloaded, and plan to read through it one of these > days. > That is good... :) I must say I miss him, he hasn't been around in a while from what I know. - Lars ###### From: "Lars Foleide" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 21:23:42 +0200 Organization: UNINETT news service Lines: 239 Message-ID: <8t236h$bnn$1@snipp.uninett.no> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: 158.38.79.117 X-Trace: snipp.uninett.no 972328977 12023 158.38.79.117 (23 Oct 2000 19:22:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news-abuse@uninett.no X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!uni-erlangen.de!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!newscore.univie.ac.at!uninett.no!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:55832 Hi Gunnar, (Sorry for the late reply, it has been a busy week, went visiting my father and sister for several days, and got a visit from an old friend when I got back) Gunnar Ljungstrand wrote in message news:39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se... > > > Yeh, I see what you mean, and understand why you might have this view. > > It is mostly the result of the experience with OBEs I have had, even if > I am certainly influenced by the ideas of others to some extent too. > > For instance: Not in a single one of my about 200 OBEs have I had to > return "manually" and "reinsert" myself into my physbod. When the > experience ends, I just fade away and find myself back. No sense of > movement whatsoever. > > On the other hand I do have a sense of movement *at the start* of most > of my OBEs, when I "rise up" and separate from my physbod, after getting > the vibes. Usually it takes some willpower to "get loose", but even > after that movement is sluggish and perception vague, but getting better > the more I distance myself from my physbod. > > This has led me to this hypothesis: That I, when I get the vibes, am > *already* focused in the Astral, but that my astral body still is > consonant in position with the physical. There seems to be an attraction > between them growing weaker by distance, which would explain the effort > needed to move away. > > Also, being in an OBE seems to require a lot of energy, and when that > energy runs out focus seems to be automatically shifted back to the > physical body (the astral one presumably being dragged back too). > > This is but one of the reasons I have to think of it more as *focusing*. Eh... Your experiences seems rather normal and all that, but how you manage to come up with the hypothesis that it is a matter of "focusing" do I fail to understand. As I see it does it take some energy to leave the body, and there aren't any work done without the use of energy, and in my opinion does the body require a certain level of energy to survive, so after a certain amount of time, when your energy reach a critical level does it decide to return. The return is instant, as your survival instinct is higher than your will to remain out. We might discuss if there really is something called an astral body, or if that is just something we unconsciously create because that is what we are used to. And I would also claim that movement is also something that we are used to, and also the reason for why we are using time to move from A to B. When the transfer can be instant in my opinion. But it would of course not be as easy, as it is a new concept of moving, and it would be like learning to walk again. (Though, not as difficult) I just finished reading a book called Dream reality : The conscious creation of dream and paranormal experience by James J. Donahoe The author is a very talented and experienced man in the realm of paranormal phenomena, everything from mutual dreams, precognitive dreams, to healing and out of body experiences... Here is an account from the book that I would like to quote: 'I was lying down bringing on the sensation of vibration that frequently accompanies my leaving the body. As this sensation began, my internal imagery became very bright and was soon replaced by the sight of the room through my closed eyelids. I began moving out of the body and once out in a bodiless state, I caught myself beginning to assume a shape similar to my physical body because of familiarity with it.' John Lilly writes in his book 'The center of the Cyclone' that he feels that the second body is a hallucination created for psychological security by the person leaving the usual body consciousness. To this way of thinking, any unnecessary conceptual constructs should be eliminated as they merely hamper the traveler.. > > > But the main difference from me and you is that I have another big > > interest, and that is orgone energy. Or that is at least what I like > > to call it, it has at least 27 other names. (Given by at least 27 > > other people, that alone should suggest that such an energy actually > > exist). > > Ok, any reason why such an energy could not exist even in a > "focus"-scenario? You do of course change focus when you travel from one place to another, like when your OBE ends, your focus is changed back to your body. But I don't like using the word focus, and I might just as well explain that the same thing with the term energy. > > > And I see a connection between out of body experiences, psionics, > > remote viewing, the like and orgone energy. So that your model does > > not fit into to my set of knowledge, it is both more logical for me to > > explain it with energies, more understandable, and much of what I know > > backs that up. Meaning that there is actually something that is > > travelling, not just a change of focus. > > I can see what you mean, and I´m not saying that you are wrong; I > honestly don´t *know* how it works and my model is just that - a model. > However, my experience so far seems to back up the "focus" model rather > than literal travel. That does not detract anything at all from the > beauty of it though, quite the contrary. > > > It is also my understanding that with a better understanding of this > > energy, how it works, what affects it, and how it affects us, then out > > of body experiences should be a problem to induce either. > > Possibly, but I don´t think we will see any OBE-producing device any > time soon. It seems to me that something that has resisted understanding > by the greatest mystics of all times probably will not yield its secrets > so easy. Hehe... there are many "secrets" in books and other mediums out there. And OBEs aren't all that fascinating, and I doubt you will find the "solution" in a book primly about OBEs. It is more about physics, you need to understand the basics before you might take a new and revolutionary approach in solving a "problem". The truth is out there, you just have to find it. Finding it is one things, sharing it with the public in a manner that it will be believed is another. I don't think a revolution in this area is too far into the future.... .... but we'll see. > > > But it is a very subtle energy that is hard to conduct research on, > > were sensitive people undoubtedly is nice to have. But that doesn't mean > > that it is impossible... > > Nothing is impossible. Have to agree on that. > > > Interesting... but I don't think ghosts are just people that are other > > people at are travelling out of their body. > > Not that all are, of course, but some probably are. > > BTW, I did this in a few OBEs in the beginning. At one time I had flown > into someone´s apartment, and I was annoyed with that nobody seemed to > notice me. I floated upstairs and into a bedroom, where a woman sat > reading a book. I tried to talk to her, but she didn´t look up. > > So I pushed down a few books from a shelf. She was startled by the crash > and rose up to have a look, but still didn´t seem to see me. Then I > pushed down a few more. Now when she clearly saw them sliding out of the > shelf (by themselves, supposedly) and falling down she looked very > scared and bolted out from the room. > > Afterward I was somewhat ashamed with myself for doing this, but at the > time all I could think of was getting her attention (and I wanted to see > if I could "haunt" too ;-). The limits you have in this state, is it more like in the waking state, or can you lift 200 kilos without much problem? Like could you lift her bed? And you should focus on the intent of making light, not just moving things. > > > And that experience also suggests that you are an energy > > concentration.. > > Hmm... more like I am *in* an energy concentration I would say. Oki, I guess I could rephrase that. It is your mind that is controlling things all the way. Either it is your physical body, energy in the astral or something else at a higher plane. It is the will of your mind that cause things to happen... One thing is for sure, your mind does not live and die with your brain. Though, there is a strong correlation between your mind and body. > > > Hehehe.... doesn't surprise me at all... > > Should we do something to 'save' these skeptics? :) > > No. > > Then we would be no better than proselytizing religious people or > skeptics out to "save" us "stupid woo-woos" from ourselves. They have > the right to their view, and the right to their own mistakes. Everyone > must walk their own path. > > Actually, I don´t think anyone should try to "save" anyone else under > any circumstance. That invariably entails coercion and that is *wrong*. > If someone is ready for OBEs s/he will have them, sooner or later. If > someone can´t accept at least the possibility, s/he is quite simply not > ready for them at this time. I like at least the idea of sharing my view of the truth, then it is up the rest if they want to believe it or not. > > > Du er inne i en dårlig periode ja... > > Nei, jeg har igrunnen aldri skikkelig prøvd å ha en OBE. Men så har > > jeg heller ikke hatt særlig med tid før nå. Jeg var mest aktiv her før > > jeg drog i militæret, etter det gikk det hand i hand med høgskolen. > > Der jeg var ekstremt sosial det første året, rota meg inn i et forhold > > og fikk mye å tenke på som ikke var særlig relatert til 'spirituel > > utvikling'... > > Jag förstår... ;-) bra.. ;) > > > Så jobbet jeg veldig mye overtid i sommer, men i år har jeg gjort en > > del forandringer, blitt mindre sosial, leser mer bøker og er mer > > fokusert. Mest på grunn av at noen gode kompiser av meg har flyttet, > > men har enda ikke gjort noe særlig annet enn å samle inn information. > > Men har for første gang tenkt å gjøre noe seriøst med tanke på OBE og > > lucid dreams. Skal prøve alle mulige fremgangsmåter jeg kommer på, og > > det er faen meg det mange... :) (Skal også eksperimentere mer med > > orgone energi) > > Ok. Av någon anledning har jag inte haft så värst många LDs. Har väl > haft ett tiotal eller så, men många fler OBEer (fast inte så många just > nu tyvärr). Jeg lurer på om jeg skal dele opp døgnet i to søvnfaser, var visstnok anbefalt for å drive med avansert drømmeforskning. Passer meg ypperlig, ettersom jeg har ca. bare 2 timer skole hver dag, pluss fri hver fredag. Og har ingen andre forpliktelser før eksamen. Jeg synest heller ikke at det viktig å ha et sosialt liv. Selv om det er vanskelig å unngå. Så istedenfor å sove 8-11 timer hver natt, så kan jeg heller sove 5-6 timer om natten, og 5-6 timer på ettermiddagen. De timene jeg er våken kan jeg lese bøker, være på internet og kanskje gjøre _litt_ lekser... :) Med vennlig hilsen, Lars ###### From: Gunnar Ljungstrand Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 20:03:59 +0200 Organization: Telenordia Lines: 194 Message-ID: <39F5CF0F.7D9818C4@algonet.se> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <8t236h$bnn$1@snipp.uninett.no> Reply-To: dervak@algonet.se NNTP-Posting-Host: du58-27.ppp.algonet.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: cubacola.tninet.se 972410638 7610 195.100.27.58 (24 Oct 2000 18:03:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@algo.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 24 Oct 2000 18:03:58 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: sv,en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news-stu1.dfn.de!news-mue1.dfn.de!news-nue1.dfn.de!uni-erlangen.de!newsfeed1.telenordia.se!news.algonet.se!algonet!pepsi.tninet.se!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:55877 Hi Lars, Lars Foleide wrote: > > Hi Gunnar, > > (Sorry for the late reply, it has been a busy week, went visiting my > father and sister for several days, and got a visit from an old friend > when I got back) No problem. > Eh... > Your experiences seems rather normal and all that, but how you manage > to come up with the hypothesis that it is a matter of "focusing" do I > fail to understand. Lack of any sensation of movement at the end of the OBEs, combined with really the same lack at the start (I consider myself in the OBE state at the onset of the vibes, not the conscious "separation" - this certainly implies that there is no "movement" involved (in the usual sense, at least). As for my focus model, it is admittedly only a hypothesis too, but it seems to fit the data better. I mean, if there really was something that moved away (as in physical distance) from the physbod, don´t you think that "subtle body" would have to return at the end of the OBE then? Even if one assumes a "silver cord" taking care of the guidance, and even if the process would be automatic, wouldn´t you think there would be at least some feeling of movement, a jerk at least? > As I see it does it take some energy to leave the body, and there > aren't any work done without the use of energy, and in my opinion does > the body require a certain level of energy to survive, so after a > certain amount of time, when your energy reach a critical level does > it decide to return. The return is instant, as your survival instinct > is higher than your will to remain out. If that was so, a large degree of fatigue might be expected when you return - after all the energy level is supposed to be critically low and the survival instinct is involved. This isn´t the case at all, quite the contrary. I always feel invigorated after an OBE. There is certainly a lack of energy factor involved tho, but of another kind, I think. But I might be wrong. > We might discuss if there really is something called an astral body, > or if that is just something we unconsciously create because that is > what we are used to. And I would also claim that movement is also > something that we are used to, and also the reason for why we are > using time to move from A to B. When the transfer can be instant > in my opinion. But it would of course not be as easy, as it is a new > concept of moving, and it would be like learning to walk again. > (Though, not as difficult) I agree. > I just finished reading a book called Dream reality : The conscious > creation of dream and paranormal experience by James J. Donahoe > > The author is a very talented and experienced man in the realm of > paranormal phenomena, everything from mutual dreams, precognitive > dreams, to healing and out of body experiences... > > Here is an account from the book that I would like to quote: > 'I was lying down bringing on the sensation of vibration that > frequently accompanies my leaving the body. As this sensation began, > my internal imagery became very bright and was soon replaced by the > sight of the room through my closed eyelids. I´ve done that too. > I began moving out of the body and once out in a bodiless state, I > caught myself beginning to assume a shape similar to my physical body > because of familiarity with it.' I kinda agree. > John Lilly writes in his book 'The center of the Cyclone' that he > feels that the second body is a hallucination created for > psychological security by the person leaving the usual body > consciousness. To this way of thinking, any unnecessary conceptual > constructs should be eliminated as they merely hamper the traveler.. Yes, I think it is likely this is so. > You do of course change focus when you travel from one place to > another, like when your OBE ends, your focus is changed back > to your body. > But I don't like using the word focus, and I might just as well > explain that the same thing with the term energy. So we think roughly the same, but are using different words then... > Hehe... there are many "secrets" in books and other mediums out there. Indeed there are, but that´s not what I´m talking about. > And OBEs aren't all that fascinating, But they are! I think you´ll reconsider when you have them Lars... :-D I think they are the most fascinating thing there is, beating everything else with a very wide margin... > and I doubt you will find the "solution" in a book primly about OBEs. > It is more about physics, you need to understand the basics before you > might take a new and revolutionary approach in solving a "problem". > The truth is out there, you just have to find it. What is truth? Is there any such thing? If there is, can we know? I tend to think that *anything* is possible in principle, and that what is known as natural laws probably are rules valid in a certain context only, and may be changed if you know how. Kinda like how a computer works. A computer program may do absolutely anything (within hardware constraints), but the logic of the program in question can be considered "natural laws" for information processed in that program. As long as you are stuck in that program you must obey its rules, but if you manage to switch to another program, or reprogram the computer... ;-) > Finding it is one things, sharing it with the public in a manner that > it will be believed is another. I don't think a revolution in this > area is too far into the future.... > .... but we'll see. I´m a little more pessimistic, but I´d love to be wrong! :-) > The limits you have in this state, is it more like in the waking > state, or can you lift 200 kilos without much problem? Like could you > lift her bed? I don´t know (didn´t attempt it). > And you should focus on the intent of making light, not just moving > things. Perhaps I should have done that. However, in the OBE state you are extremely vulnerable to your own random whims, as you will see when you get there. > Oki, I guess I could rephrase that. It is your mind that is > controlling things all the way. Either it is your physical body, > energy in the astral or something else at a higher plane. It is the > will of your mind that cause things to happen... One thing is for > sure, your mind does not live and die with your brain. Though, there > is a strong correlation between your mind and body. I agree. > I like at least the idea of sharing my view of the truth, then it is > up the rest if they want to believe it or not. Of course you should be allowed to share your view if you feel like it. If someone indicates s/he is not interested, then you should not press. What I´m opposed to is the manner of doing it, practiced by religious people and septics alike, not respecting an alternative viewpoint. > Jeg lurer på om jeg skal dele opp døgnet i to søvnfaser, var visstnok > anbefalt for å drive med avansert drømmeforskning. Passer meg > ypperlig, ettersom jeg har ca. bare 2 timer skole hver dag, pluss > fri hver fredag. Og har ingen andre forpliktelser før eksamen. Jag tror det kan vara en bra idé. > Jeg synest heller ikke at det viktig å ha et sosialt liv. Selv om det > er vanskelig å unngå. Så istedenfor å sove 8-11 timer hver natt, så > kan jeg heller sove 5-6 timer om natten, og 5-6 timer på > ettermiddagen. Du sover rätt mycket... ;-) > De timene jeg er våken kan jeg lese bøker, være på internet og kanskje > gjøre _litt_ lekser... :) Låter fint... :-) > Med vennlig hilsen, > Lars See you out there... /Gunnar --------------------- - Question Authority! - Yeah, Says Who? --------------------- ###### From: "Lars Foleide" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 16:41:19 +0200 Organization: UNINETT news service Lines: 270 Message-ID: <8t9fnf$bo4$1@snipp.uninett.no> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <8t236h$bnn$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39F5CF0F.7D9818C4@algonet.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: 158.38.79.117 X-Trace: snipp.uninett.no 972571183 12036 158.38.79.117 (26 Oct 2000 14:39:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news-abuse@uninett.no X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!fr.clara.net!small.fr.clara.net!news.tele.dk!128.39.3.166!uninett.no!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:56116 Hi Gunnar, "Gunnar Ljungstrand" wrote in message > > > Eh... > > Your experiences seems rather normal and all that, but how you manage > > to come up with the hypothesis that it is a matter of "focusing" do I > > fail to understand. > > Lack of any sensation of movement at the end of the OBEs, combined with > really the same lack at the start (I consider myself in the OBE state at > the onset of the vibes, not the conscious "separation" - this certainly > implies that there is no "movement" involved (in the usual sense, at > least). > > As for my focus model, it is admittedly only a hypothesis too, but it > seems to fit the data better. > > I mean, if there really was something that moved away (as in physical > distance) from the physbod, don´t you think that "subtle body" would > have to return at the end of the OBE then? Even if one assumes a "silver > cord" taking care of the guidance, and even if the process would be > automatic, wouldn´t you think there would be at least some feeling of > movement, a jerk at least? No, I don't see that as a necessity. If we are talking about energy that transform into to something else, then there wouldn't be much that returns if you stay out until you can't anymore. I don't like the silver cord either, since it might very well be a product of our creative mind. (Expectations, assumptions, etc..) I have seen very little evidence that it is in fact real. Sure one might subconsciously create one, but I doubt that it is really necessary. And will most likely just create unnecessary fear and maybe hamper your projection. > > > As I see it does it take some energy to leave the body, and there > > aren't any work done without the use of energy, and in my opinion does > > the body require a certain level of energy to survive, so after a > > certain amount of time, when your energy reach a critical level does > > it decide to return. The return is instant, as your survival instinct > > is higher than your will to remain out. > > If that was so, a large degree of fatigue might be expected when you > return - after all the energy level is supposed to be critically low and > the survival instinct is involved. This isn´t the case at all, quite the > contrary. I always feel invigorated after an OBE. There is certainly a > lack of energy factor involved tho, but of another kind, I think. > > But I might be wrong. That wasn't exactly what I meant, let me post another theory: During the vibrational part, or just before you are leaving your body is an energy construct being made. Your consciousness shift it's focus into this energy (while your consciousness resides as a much, much higher plane, so there is just a shift of focus, _YOU_ aren't the energy, it is just your new "car") But this energy constructs weakens as you throw down books, move around, move in time and communicate with others. So if you fail to get more energy on your journey, do you at some point become run out of energy and return to your body. That feeling of invigorated after an OBE might have no direct connection with the OBE, might just be a feeling of happiness, and joy after a success OBE. It is more of a body chemistry thing, as a result of success rather than something you bring back. But I don't think there is just one type of OBE. But how many types there are, what the differences are, and if there is a different level of danger at each one of them, I don't know. I haven't studied this subject that much. So don't expect that this problem only have one solution. > > > We might discuss if there really is something called an astral body, > > or if that is just something we unconsciously create because that is > > what we are used to. And I would also claim that movement is also > > something that we are used to, and also the reason for why we are > > using time to move from A to B. When the transfer can be instant > > in my opinion. But it would of course not be as easy, as it is a new > > concept of moving, and it would be like learning to walk again. > > (Though, not as difficult) > > I agree. > > > I just finished reading a book called Dream reality : The conscious > > creation of dream and paranormal experience by James J. Donahoe > > > > The author is a very talented and experienced man in the realm of > > paranormal phenomena, everything from mutual dreams, precognitive > > dreams, to healing and out of body experiences... > > > > Here is an account from the book that I would like to quote: > > 'I was lying down bringing on the sensation of vibration that > > frequently accompanies my leaving the body. As this sensation began, > > my internal imagery became very bright and was soon replaced by the > > sight of the room through my closed eyelids. > > I´ve done that too. > > > I began moving out of the body and once out in a bodiless state, I > > caught myself beginning to assume a shape similar to my physical body > > because of familiarity with it.' > > I kinda agree. > > > John Lilly writes in his book 'The center of the Cyclone' that he > > feels that the second body is a hallucination created for > > psychological security by the person leaving the usual body > > consciousness. To this way of thinking, any unnecessary conceptual > > constructs should be eliminated as they merely hamper the traveler.. > > Yes, I think it is likely this is so. > > > You do of course change focus when you travel from one place to > > another, like when your OBE ends, your focus is changed back > > to your body. > > But I don't like using the word focus, and I might just as well > > explain that the same thing with the term energy. > > So we think roughly the same, but are using different words then... Yeh... roughly the same.. But I still think there is "something" (energy or something) that is moving physically away from the body during an OBE. Not that you just shift your focus to somewhere else. > > > Hehe... there are many "secrets" in books and other mediums out there. > > Indeed there are, but that´s not what I´m talking about. > > > And OBEs aren't all that fascinating, > > But they are! I think you´ll reconsider when you have them Lars... :-D > > I think they are the most fascinating thing there is, beating everything > else with a very wide margin... There are others paths to what you might achieve with OBEs, that is more powerful, more controllable and easier. But it requires a lot of knowledge and understanding to get there. And a lot of research has to be done... (I'm not saying that OBE isn't fascinating, they can at least be, but working with the energy might be just as fun) > > > and I doubt you will find the "solution" in a book primly about OBEs. > > It is more about physics, you need to understand the basics before you > > might take a new and revolutionary approach in solving a "problem". > > The truth is out there, you just have to find it. > > What is truth? Is there any such thing? If there is, can we know? What works, works... But there is no truth until something has been proven, and if you look very deep into various things, then you'll see that what some people claim to be proof, certainly isn't even close. As long as something might be caused by something else, something undiscovered, then we can't claim that something is proven. And fundamental changes in the basis of science is hard to make, if you say that Einstein is wrong, then very few will listen to you as many people admire him (mostly because they can't completely understand him). If you want the truth, you can't go searching from sources that are widely accepted, and were new "proof" have been built upon old "proof". You can know that something is wrong at least, just read some books that go against accepted science... > > I tend to think that *anything* is possible in principle, and that what > is known as natural laws probably are rules valid in a certain context > only, and may be changed if you know how. Agreed. > > Kinda like how a computer works. A computer program may do absolutely > anything (within hardware constraints), but the logic of the program in > question can be considered "natural laws" for information processed in > that program. As long as you are stuck in that program you must obey its > rules, but if you manage to switch to another program, or reprogram the > computer... ;-) something like that.. :) > > > Finding it is one things, sharing it with the public in a manner that > > it will be believed is another. I don't think a revolution in this > > area is too far into the future.... > > .... but we'll see. > > I´m a little more pessimistic, but I´d love to be wrong! :-) > > > And you should focus on the intent of making light, not just moving > > things. > > Perhaps I should have done that. However, in the OBE state you are > extremely vulnerable to your own random whims, as you will see when you > get there. So it might be compared to being very drunk on alcohol? If I consume so much alcohol that I have difficulties remembering what I've done, up to several hours, then I stop thinking through what I'm doing. I just do it the instant that the thought surface. (Meaning that you might also to some very stupid things :( ) It can be fun, but I also like control. And not doing things that I will later regret. > > Oki, I guess I could rephrase that. It is your mind that is > > controlling things all the way. Either it is your physical body, > > energy in the astral or something else at a higher plane. It is the > > will of your mind that cause things to happen... One thing is for > > sure, your mind does not live and die with your brain. Though, there > > is a strong correlation between your mind and body. > > I agree. > > > I like at least the idea of sharing my view of the truth, then it is > > up the rest if they want to believe it or not. > > Of course you should be allowed to share your view if you feel like it. > If someone indicates s/he is not interested, then you should not press. I agree, but there are many ways of making people interested. Most people aren't interested in watching commercials, but they still do. And when you first have the attention of someone, then just mention something else that people want or that is interesting. Give some kind of reference (like a link) and you should get a response. We are all different, but there are certain things that we are all interested in. The clue is to create a domino effect. > > What I´m opposed to is the manner of doing it, practiced by religious > people and septics alike, not respecting an alternative viewpoint. > > > Jeg lurer på om jeg skal dele opp døgnet i to søvnfaser, var visstnok > > anbefalt for å drive med avansert drømmeforskning. Passer meg > > ypperlig, ettersom jeg har ca. bare 2 timer skole hver dag, pluss > > fri hver fredag. Og har ingen andre forpliktelser før eksamen. > > Jag tror det kan vara en bra idé. Jeg bør prøve det ihvertfall... > > > Jeg synest heller ikke at det viktig å ha et sosialt liv. Selv om det > > er vanskelig å unngå. Så istedenfor å sove 8-11 timer hver natt, så > > kan jeg heller sove 5-6 timer om natten, og 5-6 timer på > > ettermiddagen. > > Du sover rätt mycket... ;-) > Ting er ikke som det var i gamle dager, da jeg klarte meg fint med 6-7 timer søvn, så lenge jeg fikk sovet lenge i helga. Men før da MÅTTE jeg opp, nå er ikke det så viktig lengre. Man lærer nesten mer av å lese i 2 timer enn å være på forelesning i 2 timer. Pluss at jeg ikke har noe viktige fag tidlig på dagen, så da blir det mer søvn også. Men slik som det er i dag, så får ikke utnyttet den sikkelig; legger meg til å sove, sover i x antall timer og står opp. Bør heller våkne flere ganger i løpet av et døgn, og dele opp søvnen mer.. Tanken er god, men å få det ut i praksis er litt værre... - Lars ###### From: Gunnar Ljungstrand Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 21:52:31 +0200 Organization: Telenordia Lines: 210 Message-ID: <39F88B7F.416C7A58@algonet.se> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <8t236h$bnn$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39F5CF0F.7D9818C4@algonet.se> <8t9fnf$bo4$1@snipp.uninett.no> Reply-To: dervak@algonet.se NNTP-Posting-Host: du117-26.ppp.algonet.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: zingo.tninet.se 972589952 9914 195.100.26.117 (26 Oct 2000 19:52:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@algo.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 26 Oct 2000 19:52:32 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: sv,en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!uni-erlangen.de!newsfeed1.telenordia.se!news.algonet.se!algonet!pepsi.tninet.se!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:56061 Hi Lars, Lars Foleide wrote: > > Hi Gunnar, > > > wouldn´t you think there would be at least some feeling of > > movement, a jerk at least? > > No, I don't see that as a necessity. If we are talking about energy > that transform into to something else, then there wouldn't be much > that returns if you stay out until you can't anymore. I still think there should be some sensation if there is movement in the physical spacetime. Keep in mind that there is inertia and exchange of momentum involved with any material object moving (really accelerating), even with energy such as photons. If there is not any momentum-exchange, then I think it makes no sense to speak about "movement" in the physical sense at least. Now if you speak about "moving" in a non-physical, non-spatial sense, sort of moving *inwards*, then I´m ok with the term. Sort of moving at 90 degrees angle to *every* direction. It seems that most OBEs take place "elsewhere", rather than in the physical world, that is, in the Astral. However, it is said to be possible to do it in the physical too (or in some borderzone). In that case there might be actual physical movement of a subtle body involved (ethereal body). Some people say they do have to "reinsert" themselves at the end of an OBE, and that they do feel a jerk then. This might be a symptom of a "real-time" OBE, as distinct from an Astral OBE. In the end it might be that what is spoken about as OBE is in fact several different phenomena, or as I prefer to think of it, a continuum with different amounts of certain characteristics. > I don't like the silver cord either, since it might very well be a > product of our creative mind. (Expectations, assumptions, etc..) > I have seen very little evidence that it is in fact real. Sure one > might subconsciously create one, but I doubt that it is really > necessary. And will most likely just create unnecessary fear and maybe > hamper your projection. Yep. I have never seen any such cord during any OBE. OTOH, if it derived from expectations only I should have seen it, since I certainly expected to see it in my first OBEs. Perhaps this is another indication that there may be different kinds of OBEs... > That wasn't exactly what I meant, let me post another theory: > > During the vibrational part, or just before you are leaving your body > is an energy construct being made. Your consciousness shift its focus > into this energy (while your consciousness resides as a much, much > higher plane, so there is just a shift of focus, _YOU_ aren't the > energy, it is just your new "car") Exactly. > But this energy constructs weakens as you throw down books, move > around, move in time and communicate with others. So if you fail to > get more energy on your journey, do you at some point become > run out of energy and return to your body. Sounds fairly plausible, but I think the major energy drain is more the effort of maintaining a lucid, waking-quality consciousness "out there". In the same way, ordinary dreams may be very long, but LDs are notoriously unstable (at least for me). > That feeling of invigorated after an OBE might have no direct > connection with the OBE, might just be a feeling of happiness, and joy > after a success OBE. It is more of a body chemistry thing, as a result > of success rather than something you bring back. I don´t think so. Especially after longer OBEs there is a certain *tingling* in the whole body. Quite pleasant. > But I don't think there is just one type of OBE. But how many types > there are, what the differences are, and if there is a different level > of danger at each one of them, I don't know. I haven't studied this > subject that much. So don't expect that this problem only have one > solution. I never do. > Yeh... roughly the same.. But I still think there is "something" > (energy or something) that is moving physically away from the body > during an OBE. Not that you just shift your focus to somewhere else. Like I said, it might be so in certain kinds of OBEs. However, in most I think not. > There are others paths to what you might achieve with OBEs, that is > more powerful, more controllable and easier. Really? How do you know? :-) > But it requires a lot of knowledge and understanding to get there. And > a lot of research has to be done... Indeed. > (I'm not saying that OBE isn't fascinating, they can at least be, but > working with the energy might be just as fun) One thing need not exclude the other. Actually energy work can be very beneficial to both the quality and quantity to your OBEs. > What works, works... > But there is no truth until something has been proven, and if you look > very deep into various things, then you'll see that what some people > claim to be proof, certainly isn't even close. As long as something > might be caused by something else, something undiscovered, then we > can't claim that something is proven. Said Charles H. Fort: "Nothing has ever been proven." I agree with him. > And fundamental changes in the basis of science is hard to make, if > you say that Einstein is wrong, then very few will listen to you as > many people admire him (mostly because they can't completely > understand him). Indeed. And as Niels Bohr said (roughly): "Anyone who is not worried about the implications of Quantum Mechanics has not understood it." > If you want the truth, you can't go searching from sources that are > widely accepted, and were new "proof" have been built upon old > "proof". You can know that something is wrong at least, just read some > books that go against accepted science... I think that if you want the truth, or at least a close approximation of it, then you have to go for personal experience. There is no substitute for it, since *all* other info could be wrong. What you have experienced, you have experienced. That is all you can know. Everything else is speculation, extrapolation and models. That is the beauty of OBEs - this is something you can do *yourself*. Granted, it is not easy to learn, but it is possible. > > However, in the OBE state you are extremely vulnerable to your own > > random whims, as you will see when you get there. > > So it might be compared to being very drunk on alcohol? Maybe very superficially, but it is really a different thing. See below. > If I consume so much alcohol that I have difficulties remembering > what I've done, up to several hours, then I stop thinking through what > I'm doing. I just do it the instant that the thought surface. (Meaning > that you might also to some very stupid things :( ) It is kinda different to explain, but during an OBE your state of mind is not the same as normal. It is similar to being drunk in the sense that you have less inhibitions (really *no* inhibitions), but there is no loss of clarity or coordination involved. All emotions are very much more intense, and you are very vulnerable to any whims you get. You may have planned to do some serious experimentation, but when you do get "out" you see something more interesting (like e.g. a beautiful girl... ;-) , and promptly forgetting your original intent. There is a certain irresponsibility too, fueled by a feeling that you can get away with *anything* (and you usually can). Sometimes I have done things I felt bad about afterwards... > It can be fun, but I also like control. And not doing things that I > will later regret. It is better that way, of course. > I agree, but there are many ways of making people interested. Most > people aren't interested in watching commercials, but they still do. I almost never do. Don´t watch much TV at all, really. > And when you first have the attention of someone, then just mention > something else that people want or that is interesting. Give some kind > of reference (like a link) and you should get a response. We are all > different, but there are certain things that we are all interested > in. The clue is to create a domino effect. Yes. > Ting er ikke som det var i gamle dager, da jeg klarte meg fint med 6-7 > timer søvn, så lenge jeg fikk sovet lenge i helga. Men før da MÅTTE > jeg opp, nå er ikke det så viktig lengre. Man lærer nesten mer av å > lese i 2 timer enn å være på forelesning i 2 timer. Pluss at jeg ikke > har noe viktige fag tidlig på dagen, så da blir det mer søvn også. Men > slik som det er i dag, så får ikke utnyttet den sikkelig; legger meg > til å sove, sover i x antall timer og står opp. Bør heller våkne flere > ganger i løpet av et døgn, og dele opp søvnen mer.. > Tanken er god, men å få det ut i praksis er litt værre... Precis. > - Lars See you out there... /Gunnar --------------------- - Question Authority! - Yeah, Says Who? --------------------- ###### Message-ID: <3A004EFA.1BBC@not-here.net> From: Janice X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <8t236h$bnn$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39F5CF0F.7D9818C4@algonet.se> <8t9fnf$bo4$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39F88B7F.416C7A58@algonet.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 23 NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 11:08:53 CST Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv2-8jKSRWlaPXkJuNmrWd8+ulMsyhPuIVztEqEaOCi5gTLMfy1KkzaosJFmGoLmCGAd7xeDv8FGup2KCq7!PanoPUpb7xaM7dgQyYQQLPVNrEE= X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 17:08:54 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!uni-erlangen.de!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!xfer13.netnews.com!netnews.com!hermes.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!nntp.flash.net!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news1.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:56438 Gunnar Ljungstrand wrote: > It is kinda different to explain, but during an OBE your state of mind > is not the same as normal. It is similar to being drunk in the sense > that you have less inhibitions (really *no* inhibitions), but there is > no loss of clarity or coordination involved. > > All emotions are very much more intense, and you are very vulnerable to > any whims you get. You may have planned to do some serious > experimentation, but when you do get "out" you see something more > interesting (like e.g. a beautiful girl... ;-) , and promptly forgetting > your original intent. > > There is a certain irresponsibility too, fueled by a feeling that you > can get away with *anything* (and you usually can). Sometimes I have > done things I felt bad about afterwards... This is all very much in keeping with Jay's and my experience with lucid dreaming. -- http://sites.netscape.net/jvogelsong/ ###### From: "Lars Foleide" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 15:46:28 +0100 Organization: UNINETT news service Lines: 290 Message-ID: <8trunf$8ek$1@snipp.uninett.no> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <8t236h$bnn$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39F5CF0F.7D9818C4@algonet.se> <8t9fnf$bo4$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39F88B7F.416C7A58@algonet.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: 158.38.79.117 X-Trace: snipp.uninett.no 973176367 8660 158.38.79.117 (2 Nov 2000 14:46:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news-abuse@uninett.no X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!psinet-eu-nl!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!news.tele.dk!128.39.3.166!uninett.no!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:56563 Hi Gunnar, (Again, sorry for the late reply, I've had some problems with my right hand for a few days now. I don't know what the cause is, and it isn't very painful either. But it is annoying when I'm typing, when it just gets worse when I do. I have been typing and using mouse for over 10 years, so I would find it strange if that it is the direct cause for this problem. I haven't been typing/using the mouse more than usual recently either. So this reply have been given low priority, since there is no hurry in the issue we are discussing, though it may be an important one. But I'm replying now, even though I'm not well again) "Gunnar Ljungstrand" wrote in message > > I still think there should be some sensation if there is movement in the > physical space-time. Keep in mind that there is inertia and exchange of > momentum involved with any material object moving (really accelerating), > even with energy such as photons. If there is not any momentum-exchange, > then I think it makes no sense to speak about "movement" in the physical > sense at least. It all depends on how you choose to define the procedure; if you start of as consciousness with energy, with the energy being somewhat physical, but returns just as pure consciousness. Then there wouldn't be any movement in the physical space-time, just a shift of focus. But that is of less importance, I'm just saying that even though you don't feel anything upon return, doesn't that mean that there isn't any movement of some kind at the beginning of the projection. > > Now if you speak about "moving" in a non-physical, non-spatial sense, > sort of moving *inwards*, then I´m ok with the term. Sort of moving at > 90 degrees angle to *every* direction. It is my belief that you might in other planes, or existences of higher vibrational frequency. But I DO speak about moving in space/time on this level of existence as well. > > It seems that most OBEs take place "elsewhere", rather than in the > physical world, that is, in the Astral. However, it is said to be > possible to do it in the physical too (or in some borderzone). In that > case there might be actual physical movement of a subtle body involved > (ethereal body). Agreed, but I wouldn't call it a borderzone because you might interact with it. > > Some people say they do have to "reinsert" themselves at the end of an > OBE, and that they do feel a jerk then. This might be a symptom of a > "real-time" OBE, as distinct from an Astral OBE. Because you might project to different planes, also indicate that you have different types of projection. In addition to that might there be different types of OBE where you gather information from outside. So if order to form a hypothesis in this area is a lot of information required. Those people you mention, that have to reinsert themselves into their body. Is this because they might stay out for a long as they want if not? It could be that they have to return to the body to get back to the physical existence, since different people have different levels of energy, and if a return may be caused by lack of energy, then some might as much at they have to return intentionally. > > In the end it might be that what is spoken about as OBE is in fact > several different phenomena, or as I prefer to think of it, a continuum > with different amounts of certain characteristics. Maybe... > > > I don't like the silver cord either, since it might very well be a > > product of our creative mind. (Expectations, assumptions, etc..) > > I have seen very little evidence that it is in fact real. Sure one > > might subconsciously create one, but I doubt that it is really > > necessary. And will most likely just create unnecessary fear and maybe > > hamper your projection. > > Yep. I have never seen any such cord during any OBE. OTOH, if it derived > from expectations only I should have seen it, since I certainly expected > to see it in my first OBEs. Perhaps this is another indication that > there may be different kinds of OBEs... Perhaps, but it also depends on how strong that expectation was, and if there was much room for your creative subconscious during that OBE. Like if you were in a state near REM or something... > > But this energy constructs weakens as you throw down books, move > > around, move in time and communicate with others. So if you fail to > > get more energy on your journey, do you at some point become > > run out of energy and return to your body. > > Sounds fairly plausible, but I think the major energy drain is more the > effort of maintaining a lucid, waking-quality consciousness "out there". > In the same way, ordinary dreams may be very long, but LDs are > notoriously unstable (at least for me). It might be discussed what is actually draining the energy, and maintaining lucidity seems to be an important factor. But there exists many examples on those have had extremely longs out of body experiences, lucid dreams and such... When I get tired in the physical, I get some sleep. I can't stay lucid here all the time. And the more I sleep, the more I dream. The same goes for OBEs, at some point do you get tired, and have to return to a lower plane. You see the same in the sleep stages as well, you start by going down in deep sleep, then have a short REM period, but as you get more rest, you also get longer REM. So it may be that you are gathering energy in this deep sleep, stage 4. But OBEs can be caused by other factors as well, like stress, exhaustion and accidents. > > > That feeling of invigorated after an OBE might have no direct > > connection with the OBE, might just be a feeling of happiness, and joy > > after a success OBE. It is more of a body chemistry thing, as a result > > of success rather than something you bring back. > > I don´t think so. Especially after longer OBEs there is a certain > *tingling* in the whole body. Quite pleasant. If something happens to your energy body when you are in deep sleep, so that you are in a state that gather more energy, then being out might give your body a great chance for recharging your body. So this -tingling- may not have a direct connection with your OBE, but a result of energy gathering while you were out discovering. > > > Yeh... roughly the same.. But I still think there is "something" > > (energy or something) that is moving physically away from the body > > during an OBE. Not that you just shift your focus to somewhere else. > > Like I said, it might be so in certain kinds of OBEs. However, in most I > think not. I might agree with that. But it depends on what you define as most OBEs. I also believe that you might start of as moving energy physically away from your body, but that your might energy another plane shortly after the projection. So that the kind of OBE might change while your are out. And there isn't much reason to think that the OBE have happened in the physical if you can't verify for yourself that you have been able to gather information that you couldn't be aware of otherwise. Much of it does of course depends on how it all feels like. What you expect to happen, and many of the circumstances around the experience. > > > There are others paths to what you might achieve with OBEs, that is > > more powerful, more controllable and easier. > > Really? How do you know? :-) If you are into the idea that it is energy we are dealing with here, then it would also be possible to gather, concentrate and use it in more controlled manner. But that is more about making stuff and understanding, than lie down, set your intention and wait for something to happen. > > > But it requires a lot of knowledge and understanding to get there. And > > a lot of research has to be done... > > Indeed. Just too bad that science isn't very into this, they are still proving stuff that have been proven for a _very_ long time. Evolution is difficult in an area that most people don't have first hand experience in. > > > (I'm not saying that OBE isn't fascinating, they can at least be, but > > working with the energy might be just as fun) > > One thing need not exclude the other. Actually energy work can be very > beneficial to both the quality and quantity to your OBEs. Of course, I didn't mean that I don't find OBEs to be interesting, even though I may find other things to be more interesting. But I like control, so instead of practicing OBEs and LDs a lot, maybe having them once a month, or once a week. Do I also seek to the core, trying to understand every little detail at hand, the energy, the circumstances, sleep, dreams, food, drugs, electromagnetic, time, moon phase, gravitational variations, etc. Basically everything that might affect, induce or help the phenomenon. Actually having an OBE, a normal OBE, doesn't prove much to me. It wont be a life-changing experience. I doubt I would change my view on life or anything like that. My view at life and our existence have already been changed. Something more special would have to happen in the OBE for it to be a life-changing experience for me. Or I would have to use the state frequently for something I like. > > > And fundamental changes in the basis of science is hard to make, if > > you say that Einstein is wrong, then very few will listen to you as > > many people admire him (mostly because they can't completely > > understand him). > > Indeed. And as Niels Bohr said (roughly): "Anyone who is not worried > about the implications of Quantum Mechanics has not understood it." Have you understood it? I haven't looked into, just have an idea of what it is about. > > > If you want the truth, you can't go searching from sources that are > > widely accepted, and were new "proof" have been built upon old > > "proof". You can know that something is wrong at least, just read some > > books that go against accepted science... > > I think that if you want the truth, or at least a close approximation of > it, then you have to go for personal experience. There is no substitute > for it, since *all* other info could be wrong. What you have > experienced, you have experienced. That is all you can know. Everything > else is speculation, extrapolation and models. Much of the same effect would you get by hearing the experience of someone you trust. But there is of course nothing better than personal experience. Though it may take some more time, but you can at least be more certain about the results. > > That is the beauty of OBEs - this is something you can do *yourself*. > Granted, it is not easy to learn, but it is possible. It sure is, if you doubt something, you can just try it yourself. That is more than what you might do with the established "facts" in the area of science. > > If I consume so much alcohol that I have difficulties remembering > > what I've done, up to several hours, then I stop thinking through what > > I'm doing. I just do it the instant that the thought surface. (Meaning > > that you might also to some very stupid things :( ) > > It is kinda different to explain, but during an OBE your state of mind > is not the same as normal. It is similar to being drunk in the sense > that you have less inhibitions (really *no* inhibitions), but there is > no loss of clarity or coordination involved. > > All emotions are very much more intense, and you are very vulnerable to > any whims you get. You may have planned to do some serious > experimentation, but when you do get "out" you see something more > interesting (like e.g. a beautiful girl... ;-) , and promptly forgetting > your original intent. > > There is a certain irresponsibility too, fueled by a feeling that you > can get away with *anything* (and you usually can). Sometimes I have > done things I felt bad about afterwards... Ok. Sounds like a fun state to be in, especially no loss of clarity and coordination... ;-) > > I agree, but there are many ways of making people interested. Most > > people aren't interested in watching commercials, but they still do. > > I almost never do. Don´t watch much TV at all, really. Me neither, it isn't as interesting as it once were. Mostly just a few hours each week, and usually just one day each week. (The strange thing this is that I have a fairly large TV (28") that I hardly watch, I knew this before I bought it, but it was very cheap when I bought it and I will in the future get a computer with TV-OUT) My hand is killing me by now, but I want to finish with listing a few those things that cause me to think that "something" (an energy or something) is leaving the body. OBEs frequently occur as a result of unconsciousness, coma, drugs, accidents, stress, anaesthetic, shock, operation, fear, high fewer, near death situations, exhaustion, etc. It happens to every culture, every religion, all over the world, at all times. And it might happen to a person that haven't even heard of anything similar, like in an accident. That suggests to me that -something- is leaving the body. But more advanced, controlled experiments that has to do with interaction in the physical, and making it visible to others suggests that there in an energy that is leaving. And that you might use energy to induce an OBE, also suggests that we are dealing with an energy here... Cheers, Lars ###### From: Gunnar Ljungstrand Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: OBE Survey Results Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 22:16:40 +0100 Organization: Telenordia Lines: 257 Message-ID: <3A01D9B8.9906937A@algonet.se> References: <3a471aae.1484399553@cnews.newsguy.com> <8rshvm$bu7$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E1F722.65103428@algonet.se> <8rtkqm$kgi$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E348D2.CE544628@algonet.se> <8s0c1d$c30$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39E4A22A.6F1F4BC7@algonet.se> <8t236h$bnn$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39F5CF0F.7D9818C4@algonet.se> <8t9fnf$bo4$1@snipp.uninett.no> <39F88B7F.416C7A58@algonet.se> <8trunf$8ek$1@snipp.uninett.no> Reply-To: dervak@algonet.se NNTP-Posting-Host: sdu54-252.ppp.algonet.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: zingo.tninet.se 973199801 1982 195.163.252.54 (2 Nov 2000 21:16:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@algo.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Nov 2000 21:16:41 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: sv,en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news-fra1.dfn.de!news0.de.colt.net!colt.net!newspeer.highwayone.net!newsfeed1.telenordia.se!news.algonet.se!algonet!pepsi.tninet.se!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:56603 Lars Foleide wrote: > > Hi Gunnar, > > (Again, sorry for the late reply, I've had some problems with my right > hand for a few days now. [snip] That´s cool Lars, don´t overexert your hand if it´s aching. I can wait. > It all depends on how you choose to define the procedure; if you start > of as consciousness with energy, with the energy being somewhat > physical, but returns just as pure consciousness. Then there wouldn't > be any movement in the physical space-time, just a shift of focus. Yes. > But that is of less importance, I'm just saying that even though you > don't feel anything upon return, doesn't that mean that there isn't > any movement of some kind at the beginning of the projection. Agreed. It doesn´t exclude the possibility, but it doesn´t support the premise either. > It is my belief that you might in other planes, or existences of > higher vibrational frequency. But I DO speak about moving in > space/time on this level of existence as well. Ok. > Agreed, but I wouldn't call it a borderzone because you might interact > with it. Well yes, but according to what I have read it is fairly difficult to do so. So I´m considering it a borderzone in more or less the same way I consider neutrinos borderzone physical (not feeling electromagnetism or strong force). > Because you might project to different planes, also indicate that you > have different types of projection. In addition to that might there be > different types of OBE where you gather information from outside. So > if order to form a hypothesis in this area is a lot of information > required. Absolutely. > Those people you mention, that have to reinsert themselves into their > body. Is this because they might stay out for a long as they want if > not? I don´t know really. Personally I have never had to do this, but I have heard it from others. > It could be that they have to return to the body to get back to the > physical existence, since different people have different levels of > energy, and if a return may be caused by lack of energy, then some > might as much at they have to return intentionally. Possibly. > > In the end it might be that what is spoken about as OBE is in fact > > several different phenomena, or as I prefer to think of it, a > > continuum with different amounts of certain characteristics. > > Maybe... IMO there is no such thing as a separate thing, entity, place or event. *Everything* is connected, part of something else. > Perhaps, but it also depends on how strong that expectation was, and > if there was much room for your creative subconscious during that OBE. > Like if you were in a state near REM or something... I don´t think I was then. REM during OBEs tend to produce "reality fluctuations", and there were no such (that I noticed). I also seem to recall that I strongly expected to see a silver cord connecting me to my physbod, and yet I did not. I even more expected to see my physbod itself, but I didn´t see it either, which made me very puzzled. As of this day I have never seen my physbod clearly during an OBE. I can see the depression in the bed, and sometimes a fuzzy "cloud" where my physbod should be. I interpret this that I am already shifted away from the physical plane. > It might be discussed what is actually draining the energy, and > maintaining lucidity seems to be an important factor. But there exists > many examples on those have had extremely longs out of body > experiences, lucid dreams and such... I know. Perhaps there are exceptions, or that those people have learned to bypass those limitations in some way. > When I get tired in the physical, I get some sleep. I can't stay lucid > here all the time. And the more I sleep, the more I dream. The same > goes for OBEs, at some point do you get tired, and have to return to a > lower plane. You see the same in the sleep stages as well, you start > by going down in deep sleep, then have a short REM period, but as you > get more rest, you also get longer REM. So it may be that you are > gathering energy in this deep sleep, stage 4. But OBEs can be caused > by other factors as well, like stress, exhaustion and accidents. Yes. > If something happens to your energy body when you are in deep sleep, > so that you are in a state that gather more energy, then being out > might give your body a great chance for recharging your body. > So this -tingling- may not have a direct connection with your OBE, > but a result of energy gathering while you were out discovering. Possibly, but this only happens after long OBEs, and never in any other case. > I might agree with that. But it depends on what you define as most > OBEs. Well, I can only speak for myself. :-) > I also believe that you might start of as moving energy physically > away from your body, but that your might energy another plane shortly > after the projection. So that the kind of OBE might change while your > are out. And there isn't much reason to think that the OBE have > happened in the physical if you can't verify for yourself that you > have been able to gather information that you couldn't be aware of > otherwise. Much of it does of course depends on how it all feels like. > What you expect to happen, and many of the circumstances around the > experience. Yes. I have had a few OBEs who *felt* different somehow, and where I could not spot any discrepancies (compared to the physical world). I think that those were possibly borderzone-physical OBEs, but I am not 100% sure, since the Astral can mimic the physical very well. > If you are into the idea that it is energy we are dealing with here, > then it would also be possible to gather, concentrate and use it in > more controlled manner. But that is more about making stuff and > understanding, than lie down, set your intention and wait for > something to happen. I see. > Just too bad that science isn't very into this, they are still proving > stuff that have been proven for a _very_ long time. Evolution is > difficult in an area that most people don't have first hand experience > in. Indeed. > Of course, I didn't mean that I don't find OBEs to be interesting, > even though I may find other things to be more interesting. But I like > control, so instead of practicing OBEs and LDs a lot, maybe having > them once a month, or once a week. Do I also seek to the core, trying > to understand every little detail at hand, the energy, the > circumstances, sleep, dreams, food, drugs, electromagnetic, time, moon > phase, gravitational variations, etc. Basically everything that might > affect, induce or help the phenomenon. > > Actually having an OBE, a normal OBE, doesn't prove much to me. It > wont be a life-changing experience. I doubt I would change my view on > life or anything like that. My view at life and our existence have > already been changed. Something more special would have to happen in > the OBE for it to be a life-changing experience for me. Or I would > have to use the state frequently for something I like. Ok. > > And as Niels Bohr said (roughly): "Anyone who is not worried about > > the implications of Quantum Mechanics has not understood it." > > Have you understood it? > I haven't looked into, just have an idea of what it is about. No, I can´t say I have. I have read up some on it, but I´m not very good at that kind of math... > Much of the same effect would you get by hearing the experience of > someone you trust. But there is of course nothing better than personal > experience. Though it may take some more time, but you can at least > be more certain about the results. Yes, or you can be certain about that it happened to you anyway. The interpretation is open to question, of course. > It sure is, if you doubt something, you can just try it yourself. That > is more than what you might do with the established "facts" in the > area of science. Exactly. So many results depend on multi-million or even -billion dollar apparata, which no ordinary person can afford. Therefore we are forced to accept the results, and the interpretations as valid - or not. > Ok. Sounds like a fun state to be in, especially no loss of clarity > and coordination... ;-) It is, believe me. :-D > Me neither, it isn't as interesting as it once were. Mostly just a few > hours each week, and usually just one day each week. > (The strange thing this is that I have a fairly large TV (28") that I > hardly watch, I knew this before I bought it, but it was very cheap > when I bought it and I will in the future get a computer with TV-OUT) I know... yesterday I installed my new videocard in my computer, a GeForce2GTS 64 MB with TV-Out... :-) > My hand is killing me by now, but I want to finish with listing a few > those things that cause me to think that "something" (an energy or > something) is leaving the body. > OBEs frequently occur as a result of unconsciousness, coma, drugs, > accidents, stress, anaesthetic, shock, operation, fear, high fewer, > near death situations, exhaustion, etc. Yes. > It happens to every culture, every religion, all over the world, at > all times. Indicating an objective phenomenon. > And it might happen to a person that haven't even heard of anything > similar, like in an accident. Yep. > That suggests to me that -something- is leaving the body. To me it suggests that it is an objective phenomenon and that something "really" happens. However, what is happening might just as well be "focusing" if we never are *in* our bodies in the first place, as I tend to think. > But more advanced, controlled experiments that has to do with > interaction in the physical, and making it visible to others suggests > that there in an energy that is leaving. At least sometimes, yes. > And that you might use energy to induce an OBE, also suggests that we > are dealing with an energy here... Some kind of "energy", certainly. > Cheers, > Lars See you out there... /Gunnar --------------------- - Question Authority! - Yeah, Says Who? ---------------------