From: "lorz" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Lines: 133 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 Message-ID: X-Complaints-To: abuse@usenetserver.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. NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 13:59:08 EDT Organization: BELLSOUTH.net Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 14:04:54 -0400 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed1.cidera.com!Cidera!cyclone-sjo1.usenetserver.com!e420r-sjo4.usenetserver.com!usenetserver.com!e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70251 "Janice" wrote in message news:MPG.15e48010d3416f36989a3e@news.starlinx.com... > In article <9bxe7.1068$0M1.15950@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com>, > lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > > > "Janice" wrote in message > > news:MPG.15e45db3a17b6e1d989a3b@news.starlinx.com... > > > > In article <3B7A0F22.F7411C3E@ozemu.com>, scrappy1@ozemu.com says... > > > > > > > > IMO, dreams and OBE's may be experiences viewed using the same > > > > input. Just that during dreams, our physical thought processes > > > > battle with our conscious mind and we wake knowing nothing of > > > > interaction with the astral. The brain/mind/ego battle is won by the > > > > physical and the dream is passed off as nothing more than something > > > > we do when we sleep. When we have an OBE ... the fully conscious > > > > mind is kept at the front of the equation, much like in a LD ... > > > > only we know now that we are not dreaming .... that we are fully > > > > aware we are having a real alternate experience in which the input > > > > we are getting is based, not only on our own thoughts, but on some > > > > other external stimuli. I can't explain this properly ... I really > > > > think you can only have experienced all three .... OBE's, LD's and > > > > dreams to understand how I come to my conclusions of *knowing* when > > > > I am dreaming or not. > > > > > > Or maybe not even then ... :) I mean, I've had plenty of LDs that seem > > > pretty realistic and stable, enough so that they can give the impression > > > of occuring in other realities, but I still think of them as dreams. I > > > don't call an experience a dream only when it responds easily to my > > > thoughts, like one I had recently in which I could just think about > > > creating a horse and there it would be, or keep changing the colors of > > > items by thought. It was so easy that even other dream characters were > > > claiming to control the dream. :) The downside was that the very > > > instability that made this possible meant that these directed changes > > > didn't last long--horses would morph into unrecognizable beasts and > > > colors would spastically change on their own. Anyway, few of my LDs are > > > that extreme in terms of their sensitivity to my thoughts. My OBEs tend > > > to be more stable than that and my lucidity tends to be on the high side > > > in them but I can also have comparatively stable, high-lucidity LDs that > > > don't feature the OBE-type transition at the beginning so for me it's > > > hard to see a significant, constant difference between the two > > > experiences. Sometimes I favor the term "superlucid dream" to describe > > > the most lucid of LDs as well as OBEs. To fantasize a bit, I would > > > imagine that if there are such things as astral worlds it wouldn't much > > > matter whether you have (or remember having) an OBE-type transition when > > > you fall asleep to get to them. The important thing would be how > > > directly you access their input, minimizing the distorting input from > > > your own mind (which is not just your thoughts by any means); and that > > > should theoretically be possible even in a regular lucid dream if your > > > lucidity level is or becomes high enough. > > > > > > -- > > > > So, in other words, the difference between what we call LD and OOBE is the > > level of lucidity achieved? What makes this level of lucidity happen though > > do you think? Just dumb luck? (or unluck in the scary cases) > > I think you have a better chance of getting a high level of lucidity in > the typical OBE than in the typical lucid dream because the typical OBE > happens before you fall deeply asleep. Your brain hasn't been giving > itself a long acetylcholine bath while holding back on the serotonin etc. > yet. :) > > > Do some of us have a benign 'flaw' in our brains that stops what is supposed > > to happen so that we occassionaly have these spontaneous experiences where > > we are aware of what is happenign and "feel" totally awake and aware when we > > are actually sleeping? > > You could say that. As I've mentioned I think it's a matter of a largely > unpredictable timing discrepancy. There are various brain systems, the > changes in which have to be coordinated in the process of falling asleep > and waking up, a process which is controlled by the brainstem. If the > parts of your brain that are involved in consciousness, thinking and so > on happen to remain highly activated while other parts such as your motor > system are sent into sleep mode then you'll experience the anomaly of a > highly conscious sleep onset. > > > That's the thing that gets me still. The "feeling" of being totally awake > > and aware in OOBE that seems unlike a typical lucid dream. The level of > > lucidity in OOBE seems more than a dream. > > I think I understand all that logically but when it is happening and I am > > sitting there saying" this is real"and " I am definitely awake and aware" , > > it *is* real and I *am* awake and aware, aren't I? > > In a different way then the normal everyday awake/aware self but awake/aware > > just the same it seems. > > I think you're quite aware. "Awake" is more questionable. In some ways > you (or your body if you prefer) are asleep. You've got that paralysis > going, for instance, which is a normal part of REM sleep. > OK but my body is very different from my mind, no? The body is asleep but not the mind then? Then *I* am awake? *I* am my mind more than my body even, no? There is no *me* without my mind. My whole body could be paralyzed in an accident and I would still be there in mind. Awake and aware even though certain parts of my brain and spine perhaps have been damaged and I can not move my limbs. I still *am*. I am aware and awake. I know we have gone through this awake/aware thing before but I'm still trying to grasp this. To me it seems I am simply awake and aware regardless of whether the stages of my *body* sleeping are in effect. If I am very aware of the SP then I am awake. The tricky part is this "double body" stuff. Is it created out of the neccessity to leave my SP body or is it me allowing my *mind* to travel? Now getting even more woo-woo..... perhaps if my mind can travel it goes quantum time traveling which could explain the differences in bed position or windows etc. The "other place" could be a duplicate place but things rearranged a bit. Our other selves may have the bed by the window rather than the door. Can you tell I just read an article on quantum theory? (September issue of Discover just came..lol) ###### From: Janice Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Message-ID: References: X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 95 NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 14:03:48 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv3-kulh1Y57namP/hDqSdSDQMzPQOs29iQJSAFsVf1GAYzhkAr++/kH039zUECf/sEei4K7GmhXrgBY0fR!wTsuvn9L/eP9c+kCh7eIdbeoVcA6KLOBx6lKbh4rojpvbaKZaEycyVj0GY+D0Z0WQisTRPWHg702!tQQ0Ep00VQ== X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html 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, 15 Aug 2001 15:07:20 -0400 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!nf3.bellglobal.com!border1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news6.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70246 In article , lorz@bellsouth.net says... > "Janice" wrote in message > news:MPG.15e48010d3416f36989a3e@news.starlinx.com... > > > I think you're quite aware. "Awake" is more questionable. In some ways > > you (or your body if you prefer) are asleep. You've got that paralysis > > going, for instance, which is a normal part of REM sleep. > > > > OK but my body is very different from my mind, no? The body is asleep but > not the mind then? Well, I was just trying to put it in the simple terms of "mind awake, body asleep" to make the concept easier to grasp. It's not really that simple. Your brain is part of your body, of course, and while it undergoes some major changes in functioning during dreaming it is still very active. Brain waves in REM are virtually indistinguishable from brain waves in waking. Imaging studies have shown that certain specific parts of the brain, such as bits of the frontal cortex (important for functions of consciousness), do decrease in activity during REM, but other parts increase in activity, and certain systems just function differently than they normally do. Your motor system is highly activated in REM, just as it is when you are awake and moving around, but it is inhibited from sending movement commands to your muscles so you don't run around while you're dreaming. And your perceptual system all but stops receiving input from the sense organs. Although unfortunately it hasn't been tested yet we can predict fairly confidently that the perceptual and motor systems are in a normal REM sleep mode during LDs but that there may well an uncharacteristically (for REM) high level of activity going on in higher cortical areas responsible for conscious functions like directed thought, reasoning ability, memory access, and so on. So if you think of the activity of those aspects of your brain functioning as your mind (or even just as the physiological support system for your mind, if you're a dualist), then that part of you is "awake" during LDs/OBEs even if in other ways you (other parts of your brain, your body, or whatever) are asleep. > Then *I* am awake? *I* am my mind more than my body even, > no? There is no *me* without my mind. My whole body could be paralyzed in an > accident and I would still be there in mind. Awake and aware even though > certain parts of my brain and spine perhaps have been damaged and I can not > move my limbs. I still *am*. I am aware and awake. The parts of your brain that are associated with consciousness will still be going gangbusters even if you're paralyzed, yes. > I know we have gone > through this awake/aware thing before but I'm still trying to grasp this. To > me it seems I am simply awake and aware regardless of whether the stages of > my *body* sleeping are in effect. Then you're identifying solely with your consciousness even though your body and brain are also part of you. > If I am very aware of the SP then I am awake. LOL, I'd say you're highly aware, or have a waking-like level of awareness. If you want to say you're "awake" you can, but I have to translate for myself keeping in mind what you mean by the term. Some aspects of you are definitely asleep during SP. > The tricky part is this "double body" stuff. Is it created out of > the neccessity to leave my SP body or is it me allowing my *mind* to travel? You would hardly need a body to travel with your mind. I think it's created out of familiarity--habit and a mental map of your body. It can be dispensed with altogether in OBEs/LDs. > Now getting even more woo-woo..... perhaps if my mind can travel it goes > quantum time traveling which could explain the differences in bed position > or windows etc. The "other place" could be a duplicate place but things > rearranged a bit. Our other selves may have the bed by the window rather > than the door. So (speaking of my own visits to these "other realities" similar to my real location) how is it that the details of the place can change when you look away then back? Why is it that glass doesn't break easily there? Why don't the light switches work? Why are the walls so flimsy you can break them apart? Why are the locks so bad that you can just pull a locked door open? Why do I reflect differently in the mirror than I appear when I look at my clothes etc.? And why do the people there talk and act like idiots? It doesn't seem very physical to me at all. > Can you tell I just read an article on quantum theory? (September issue of > Discover just came..lol) -- It's always darkest just before it goes pitch black.--Despair, Inc. My homepage: http://sites.netscape.net/jayavogelsong/ The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### From: "lorz" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body References: Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Lines: 140 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 Message-ID: X-Complaints-To: abuse@usenetserver.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. NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 16:50:25 EDT Organization: BELLSOUTH.net Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 16:56:13 -0400 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!pinatubo.switch.ch!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.frii.net!easynews!e420r-sjo4.usenetserver.com!usenetserver.com!e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70319 "Janice" wrote in message news:MPG.15e4926f7fddcba0989a40@news.starlinx.com... > In article , > lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > "Janice" wrote in message > > news:MPG.15e48010d3416f36989a3e@news.starlinx.com... > > > > > I think you're quite aware. "Awake" is more questionable. In some ways > > > you (or your body if you prefer) are asleep. You've got that paralysis > > > going, for instance, which is a normal part of REM sleep. > > > > > > > OK but my body is very different from my mind, no? The body is asleep but > > not the mind then? > > Well, I was just trying to put it in the simple terms of "mind awake, > body asleep" to make the concept easier to grasp. It's not really that > simple. Your brain is part of your body, of course, and while it > undergoes some major changes in functioning during dreaming it is still > very active. Brain waves in REM are virtually indistinguishable from > brain waves in waking. Imaging studies have shown that certain specific > parts of the brain, such as bits of the frontal cortex (important for > functions of consciousness), do decrease in activity during REM, but > other parts increase in activity, and certain systems just function > differently than they normally do. Your motor system is highly activated > in REM, just as it is when you are awake and moving around, but it is > inhibited from sending movement commands to your muscles so you don't run > around while you're dreaming. And your perceptual system all but stops > receiving input from the sense organs. Still kinda makes ya wonder why dream at all? Why doesn't that just get shut down as well? >Although unfortunately it hasn't > been tested yet we can predict fairly confidently that the perceptual and > motor systems are in a normal REM sleep mode during LDs but that there > may well an uncharacteristically (for REM) high level of activity going > on in higher cortical areas responsible for conscious functions like > directed thought, reasoning ability, memory access, and so on. So if you > think of the activity of those aspects of your brain functioning as your > mind (or even just as the physiological support system for your mind, if > you're a dualist), then that part of you is "awake" during LDs/OBEs even > if in other ways you (other parts of your brain, your body, or whatever) > are asleep. > > > Then *I* am awake? *I* am my mind more than my body even, > > no? There is no *me* without my mind. My whole body could be paralyzed in an > > accident and I would still be there in mind. Awake and aware even though > > certain parts of my brain and spine perhaps have been damaged and I can not > > move my limbs. I still *am*. I am aware and awake. > > The parts of your brain that are associated with consciousness will still > be going gangbusters even if you're paralyzed, yes. > > > I know we have gone > > through this awake/aware thing before but I'm still trying to grasp this. To > > me it seems I am simply awake and aware regardless of whether the stages of > > my *body* sleeping are in effect. > > Then you're identifying solely with your consciousness even though your > body and brain are also part of you. Yeah, I know. The whole mind/brain thing, eh? > > > If I am very aware of the SP then I am awake. > > LOL, I'd say you're highly aware, or have a waking-like level of > awareness. If you want to say you're "awake" you can, but I have to > translate for myself keeping in mind what you mean by the term. Some > aspects of you are definitely asleep during SP. But these aspects that seem to be asleep seem to be just physical ones to me. > > > The tricky part is this "double body" stuff. Is it created out of > > the neccessity to leave my SP body or is it me allowing my *mind* to travel? > > You would hardly need a body to travel with your mind. I think it's > created out of familiarity--habit and a mental map of your body. It can > be dispensed with altogether in OBEs/LDs. True but in the same reasoning if we are not used to traveling with our minds why wouldn't we "form" a physical body to feel more comfortable about it? > > > Now getting even more woo-woo..... perhaps if my mind can travel it goes > > quantum time traveling which could explain the differences in bed position > > or windows etc. The "other place" could be a duplicate place but things > > rearranged a bit. Our other selves may have the bed by the window rather > > than the door. > > So (speaking of my own visits to these "other realities" similar to my > real location) how is it that the details of the place can change when > you look away then back? Maybe you're flipping around all the alternate realities? Because you are in an area where you can somehow interact within them all? > Why is it that glass doesn't break easily > there? Why don't the light switches work? Why are the walls so flimsy > you can break them apart? Why are the locks so bad that you can just > pull a locked door open? Why do I reflect differently in the mirror than > I appear when I look at my clothes etc.? Because in this place that all alternate realities are overlapping some doors are unlocked, some are locked, some switches work, some don't, your hair is long in some, in some not, etc...? > And why do the people there > talk and act like idiots? Some alternate people are so advanced they just appear to be idiots to you? And then some are just idiots? ;) Ya think? I don't know the answers. We can only speculate but it was the best I could come up with right now. lol -- A man thinks that by mouthing hard words he understands hard things. - Herman Melville ###### From: Janice Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Message-ID: References: X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 125 NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 17:16:17 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv3-Mid47ksnt1WuPHLAzyKPX+MAjoLTPvYm3hMbX2O8cVyERl2/gppEYeUNX3+bvQIHNMqvJN9Zdf4T6lG!pw/+ofwXmavJXIt4BD0vvFx0IajW5ovHAaOm8ieGjtCf6ee8EQDqNOhZfwrUpaJu/Qrh5sSrDkvt!a2X1phaWoQ== X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html 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, 15 Aug 2001 18:19:51 -0400 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!nf3.bellglobal.com!border1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news6.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70296 In article , lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > "Janice" wrote in message > news:MPG.15e4926f7fddcba0989a40@news.starlinx.com... > > Well, I was just trying to put it in the simple terms of "mind awake, > > body asleep" to make the concept easier to grasp. It's not really that > > simple. Your brain is part of your body, of course, and while it > > undergoes some major changes in functioning during dreaming it is still > > very active. Brain waves in REM are virtually indistinguishable from > > brain waves in waking. Imaging studies have shown that certain specific > > parts of the brain, such as bits of the frontal cortex (important for > > functions of consciousness), do decrease in activity during REM, but > > other parts increase in activity, and certain systems just function > > differently than they normally do. Your motor system is highly activated > > in REM, just as it is when you are awake and moving around, but it is > > inhibited from sending movement commands to your muscles so you don't run > > around while you're dreaming. And your perceptual system all but stops > > receiving input from the sense organs. > > Still kinda makes ya wonder why dream at all? Why doesn't that just get shut > down as well? Science doesn't have a definitive answer as to why we dream. Read the chapter on The Functions of Sleep and Dreaming for a summary of the various theories. > > > If I am very aware of the SP then I am awake. > > > > LOL, I'd say you're highly aware, or have a waking-like level of > > awareness. If you want to say you're "awake" you can, but I have to > > translate for myself keeping in mind what you mean by the term. Some > > aspects of you are definitely asleep during SP. > > But these aspects that seem to be asleep seem to be just physical ones to > me. "Just" physical? > > > The tricky part is this "double body" stuff. Is it created out of > > > the neccessity to leave my SP body or is it me allowing my *mind* to > travel? > > > > You would hardly need a body to travel with your mind. I think it's > > created out of familiarity--habit and a mental map of your body. It can > > be dispensed with altogether in OBEs/LDs. > > True but in the same reasoning if we are not used to traveling with our > minds why wouldn't we "form" a physical body to feel more comfortable about > it? Form a *physical* body? How? I don't know anyone who manifest physical matter around them. If you mean do you form the shape of a physical body in OBEs because you're used to having a body, then yeah, that's basically what I said--it forms out of habit. It's just not a *necessity* since some people don't utilize a body shape in OBEs. Some experience themselves as balls of light or points of consciousness, though experiencing oneself with a dream/astral body seems to be a lot more common. > > So (speaking of my own visits to these "other realities" similar to my > > real location) how is it that the details of the place can change when > > you look away then back? > > Maybe you're flipping around all the alternate realities? Because you are in > an area where you can somehow interact within them all? But why do I have to divert my attention like that? They should be able to switch right before my eyes, no? > > Why is it that glass doesn't break easily > > there? Why don't the light switches work? Why are the walls so flimsy > > you can break them apart? Why are the locks so bad that you can just > > pull a locked door open? Why do I reflect differently in the mirror than > > I appear when I look at my clothes etc.? > > Because in this place that all alternate realities are overlapping some > doors are unlocked, some are locked, It's not that they are unlocked, it's that the doorknobs are non- functional; you don't have to turn them. Why should they be non- functional in virtually every "reality" that Ruth and I have tested except waking reality? (She's the one who taught me that trick.) > some switches work, some don't, Hardly a single one does. That's a bit suspicious, wouldn't you say? In my real house they work vastly more often than not. Is it only possible to reach an alternate reality when the power fails there? > your > hair is long in some, in some not, etc...? So the mirrors are portals to worlds other than the one my dream/astral body is in? Because I'll be wearing one thing on my dream/astral body and another thing in the mirror image. > > And why do the people there > > talk and act like idiots? > > Some alternate people are so advanced they just appear to be idiots to you? > And then some are just idiots? They would be too stupid to build houses, even houses with no electricity. And no version of me would marry a version of Jay who clacks and gibbers and rolls his eyes like an imp ... no wait ... maybe ... ;) > ;) Ya think? I don't know the answers. We can only speculate but it was > the best I could come up with right now. lol I may have to send you to the dungeon again. At this point I would start believing the astral realm hypothesis before I would start believing I was visiting alternate physical realms in OBEs. They just aren't physical enough. -- It's always darkest just before it goes pitch black.--Despair, Inc. My homepage: http://sites.netscape.net/jayavogelsong/ The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### From: crystal0wl@yahoo.com (Crystal) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: 15 Aug 2001 22:23:47 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 12 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.22.71.27 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 997939427 26942 127.0.0.1 (16 Aug 2001 05:23:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 Aug 2001 05:23:47 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-mue1.dfn.de!news-was.dfn.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70308 Snip> > Still kinda makes ya wonder why dream at all? Why doesn't that just get shut > down as well? > Snippered too LOL I think Dreaming is a necessity for us. It's our minds way of dealing with the events of the day/week/whatever we are going through at the time. Dreams are very symbolic and can be interpreted. Kind of like your own Spiritual Counselor in the subconcious. Irene ###### From: Craig Shillington Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:25:45 +1000 Organization: Deja Vous Lines: 174 Message-ID: <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp72.horsham.ozemu.com (203.24.252.72) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 997943749 9190310 203.24.252.72 (16 [27978]) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,ja Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news-fra1.dfn.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!ppp72.horsham.ozemu.COM!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70270 Hi Lorz > > "Janice" wrote in message > news:MPG.15e48010d3416f36989a3e@news.starlinx.com... > > In article <9bxe7.1068$0M1.15950@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com>, > > lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > > > > > "Janice" wrote in message > > > news:MPG.15e45db3a17b6e1d989a3b@news.starlinx.com... > > > > > > In article <3B7A0F22.F7411C3E@ozemu.com>, scrappy1@ozemu.com says... > > > > > > > > > > IMO, dreams and OBE's may be experiences viewed using the same > > > > > input. Just that during dreams, our physical thought processes > > > > > battle with our conscious mind and we wake knowing nothing of > > > > > interaction with the astral. The brain/mind/ego battle is won by the > > > > > physical and the dream is passed off as nothing more than something > > > > > we do when we sleep. When we have an OBE ... the fully conscious > > > > > mind is kept at the front of the equation, much like in a LD ... > > > > > only we know now that we are not dreaming .... that we are fully > > > > > aware we are having a real alternate experience in which the input > > > > > we are getting is based, not only on our own thoughts, but on some > > > > > other external stimuli. I can't explain this properly ... I really > > > > > think you can only have experienced all three .... OBE's, LD's and > > > > > dreams to understand how I come to my conclusions of *knowing* when > > > > > I am dreaming or not. > > > > > > > > Or maybe not even then ... :) I mean, I've had plenty of LDs that > seem > > > > pretty realistic and stable, enough so that they can give the > impression > > > > of occuring in other realities, but I still think of them as dreams. > I > > > > don't call an experience a dream only when it responds easily to my > > > > thoughts, like one I had recently in which I could just think about > > > > creating a horse and there it would be, or keep changing the colors of > > > > items by thought. It was so easy that even other dream characters > were > > > > claiming to control the dream. :) The downside was that the very > > > > instability that made this possible meant that these directed changes > > > > didn't last long--horses would morph into unrecognizable beasts and > > > > colors would spastically change on their own. Anyway, few of my LDs > are > > > > that extreme in terms of their sensitivity to my thoughts. My OBEs > tend > > > > to be more stable than that and my lucidity tends to be on the high > side > > > > in them but I can also have comparatively stable, high-lucidity LDs > that > > > > don't feature the OBE-type transition at the beginning so for me it's > > > > hard to see a significant, constant difference between the two > > > > experiences. Sometimes I favor the term "superlucid dream" to > describe > > > > the most lucid of LDs as well as OBEs. To fantasize a bit, I would > > > > imagine that if there are such things as astral worlds it wouldn't > much > > > > matter whether you have (or remember having) an OBE-type transition > when > > > > you fall asleep to get to them. The important thing would be how > > > > directly you access their input, minimizing the distorting input from > > > > your own mind (which is not just your thoughts by any means); and that > > > > should theoretically be possible even in a regular lucid dream if your > > > > lucidity level is or becomes high enough. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > So, in other words, the difference between what we call LD and OOBE is > the > > > level of lucidity achieved? What makes this level of lucidity happen > though > > > do you think? Just dumb luck? (or unluck in the scary cases) > > > > I think you have a better chance of getting a high level of lucidity in > > the typical OBE than in the typical lucid dream because the typical OBE > > happens before you fall deeply asleep. Your brain hasn't been giving > > itself a long acetylcholine bath while holding back on the serotonin etc. > > yet. :) > > > > > Do some of us have a benign 'flaw' in our brains that stops what is > supposed > > > to happen so that we occassionaly have these spontaneous experiences > where > > > we are aware of what is happenign and "feel" totally awake and aware > when we > > > are actually sleeping? > > > > You could say that. As I've mentioned I think it's a matter of a largely > > unpredictable timing discrepancy. There are various brain systems, the > > changes in which have to be coordinated in the process of falling asleep > > and waking up, a process which is controlled by the brainstem. If the > > parts of your brain that are involved in consciousness, thinking and so > > on happen to remain highly activated while other parts such as your motor > > system are sent into sleep mode then you'll experience the anomaly of a > > highly conscious sleep onset. > > > > > That's the thing that gets me still. The "feeling" of being totally > awake > > > and aware in OOBE that seems unlike a typical lucid dream. The level of > > > lucidity in OOBE seems more than a dream. > > > I think I understand all that logically but when it is happening and I > am > > > sitting there saying" this is real"and " I am definitely awake and > aware" , > > > it *is* real and I *am* awake and aware, aren't I? > > > In a different way then the normal everyday awake/aware self but > awake/aware > > > just the same it seems. > > > > I think you're quite aware. "Awake" is more questionable. In some ways > > you (or your body if you prefer) are asleep. You've got that paralysis > > going, for instance, which is a normal part of REM sleep. > > > > OK but my body is very different from my mind, no? The body is asleep but > not the mind then? Then *I* am awake? *I* am my mind more than my body even, > no? There is no *me* without my mind. My whole body could be paralyzed in an > accident and I would still be there in mind. Awake and aware even though > certain parts of my brain and spine perhaps have been damaged and I can not > move my limbs. I still *am*. I am aware and awake. I know we have gone > through this awake/aware thing before but I'm still trying to grasp this. To > me it seems I am simply awake and aware regardless of whether the stages of > my *body* sleeping are in effect. If I am very aware of the SP then I am > awake. The tricky part is this "double body" stuff. Is it created out of > the neccessity to leave my SP body or is it me allowing my *mind* to travel? IMO, we don't need to *seperate* or have a *body* at all. It more a shift in our perception of our state of consciousness at the time. We *seperate* because as physical beings we need something with which to show us we have *moved* somewhere else, even though I don't think we *move* at all. The astral body is the same .... as physical beings, if we had no body, we would be dead physically .... so we give ourselves a *body*, maybe more as a comfort thing than anything else. Honestly ... I don't think there is any need to *leave the body*, I think our mind isn't confined to the human body anyway. > Now getting even more woo-woo..... perhaps if my mind can travel it goes > quantum time traveling which could explain the differences in bed position > or windows etc. > The "other place" could be a duplicate place but things > rearranged a bit. Our other selves may have the bed by the window rather > than the door. You may also be sensing wrongly, not interpreting the information you have perceived correctly back here in the physical. You may also wish to move your bed to another position in the physical so this shows up in the astral counterpart. You may be viewing a time in the past or the future while OOB. You may be using peripheral vision during an OBE and not being able to interpret where objects are in *reality* due to this. There are many, many reasons things appear to be different than what they are here in the physical. Don't get hung up on them. Sure ... note that this happens ... but don't spend all your energy trying to explain it to yourself just now. Enjoy your experiences and see if you can learn anything from them. > Can you tell I just read an article on quantum theory? (September issue of > Discover just came..lol) I can now. ;) Craig -- The sure way to make a thing impossible- -is to think it so. --- Franklin -- alt.out-of-body Sign in List http://out-of-body.tripod.com/signin.html Janice's alt.out-of-body Homepage http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### From: "lorz" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body References: Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Lines: 183 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 Message-ID: X-Complaints-To: abuse@usenetserver.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. NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 09:25:04 EDT Organization: BELLSOUTH.net Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 09:30:57 -0400 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.frii.net!easynews!e420r-sjo4.usenetserver.com!usenetserver.com!e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70316 "Janice" wrote in message news:MPG.15e4bf90891120c8989a45@news.starlinx.com... > In article , > lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > > > "Janice" wrote in message > > news:MPG.15e4926f7fddcba0989a40@news.starlinx.com... > > > > Well, I was just trying to put it in the simple terms of "mind awake, > > > body asleep" to make the concept easier to grasp. It's not really that > > > simple. Your brain is part of your body, of course, and while it > > > undergoes some major changes in functioning during dreaming it is still > > > very active. Brain waves in REM are virtually indistinguishable from > > > brain waves in waking. Imaging studies have shown that certain specific > > > parts of the brain, such as bits of the frontal cortex (important for > > > functions of consciousness), do decrease in activity during REM, but > > > other parts increase in activity, and certain systems just function > > > differently than they normally do. Your motor system is highly activated > > > in REM, just as it is when you are awake and moving around, but it is > > > inhibited from sending movement commands to your muscles so you don't run > > > around while you're dreaming. And your perceptual system all but stops > > > receiving input from the sense organs. > > > > Still kinda makes ya wonder why dream at all? Why doesn't that just get shut > > down as well? > > Science doesn't have a definitive answer as to why we dream. Read the > chapter on The Functions of Sleep and Dreaming for a summary of the > various theories. OK . I understand all that but as you said there is no definite answer and I just wonder if we're missing the 'bigger' picture. > > > > > If I am very aware of the SP then I am awake. > > > > > > LOL, I'd say you're highly aware, or have a waking-like level of > > > awareness. If you want to say you're "awake" you can, but I have to > > > translate for myself keeping in mind what you mean by the term. Some > > > aspects of you are definitely asleep during SP. > > > > But these aspects that seem to be asleep seem to be just physical ones to > > me. > > "Just" physical? Well parts of the brain 'turn off' so to speak but doesn't seem like your mind ever sleeps so wouldn't that leave the physical? > > > > > The tricky part is this "double body" stuff. Is it created out of > > > > the neccessity to leave my SP body or is it me allowing my *mind* to > > travel? > > > > > > You would hardly need a body to travel with your mind. I think it's > > > created out of familiarity--habit and a mental map of your body. It can > > > be dispensed with altogether in OBEs/LDs. > > > > True but in the same reasoning if we are not used to traveling with our > > minds why wouldn't we "form" a physical body to feel more comfortable about > > it? > > Form a *physical* body? How? I meant form a physical body in the sense of a "astral" body in our mind to feel more comfortable with the traveling. > I don't know anyone who manifest physical > matter around them. If you mean do you form the shape of a physical body > in OBEs because you're used to having a body, then yeah, that's basically > what I said--it forms out of habit. Right, but I meant form the shape of a physical body even if your OBE was truly your mind traveling rather than it being a type of LD. > It's just not a *necessity* since > some people don't utilize a body shape in OBEs. Some experience > themselves as balls of light or points of consciousness, though > experiencing oneself with a dream/astral body seems to be a lot more > common. Sure the mind would form whatever you would want. > > > > So (speaking of my own visits to these "other realities" similar to my > > > real location) how is it that the details of the place can change when > > > you look away then back? > > > > Maybe you're flipping around all the alternate realities? Because you are in > > an area where you can somehow interact within them all? > > But why do I have to divert my attention like that? They should be able > to switch right before my eyes, no? True but maybe because you aren't practiced enough to do it that way just yet. Just like when we all have different techniques of going OBE. Whatever works, ya know? > > > Why is it that glass doesn't break easily > > > there? Why don't the light switches work? Why are the walls so flimsy > > > you can break them apart? Why are the locks so bad that you can just > > > pull a locked door open? Why do I reflect differently in the mirror than > > > I appear when I look at my clothes etc.? > > > > Because in this place that all alternate realities are overlapping some > > doors are unlocked, some are locked, > > It's not that they are unlocked, it's that the doorknobs are non- > functional; you don't have to turn them. Why should they be non- > functional in virtually every "reality" that Ruth and I have tested > except waking reality? (She's the one who taught me that trick.) > > > some switches work, some don't, > > Hardly a single one does. That's a bit suspicious, wouldn't you say? In > my real house they work vastly more often than not. Is it only possible > to reach an alternate reality when the power fails there? > > > your > > hair is long in some, in some not, etc...? > > So the mirrors are portals to worlds other than the one my dream/astral > body is in? Because I'll be wearing one thing on my dream/astral body > and another thing in the mirror image. > Could be ;) > > > And why do the people there > > > talk and act like idiots? > > > > Some alternate people are so advanced they just appear to be idiots to you? > > And then some are just idiots? > > They would be too stupid to build houses, even houses with no > electricity. And no version of me would marry a version of Jay who > clacks and gibbers and rolls his eyes like an imp ... no wait ... maybe > ... ;) > Well ok, maybe we get interference with memories of our present life so our mind tries to create that person there and fails to do so very well. > > ;) Ya think? I don't know the answers. We can only speculate but it was > > the best I could come up with right now. lol > > I may have to send you to the dungeon again. Nooooooooooo not the dungeon. I already can sense (call it ESP if you like) pz's eyes rolling and hear his wicked cackling at me in this thread! > At this point I would start > believing the astral realm hypothesis before I would start believing I > was visiting alternate physical realms in OBEs. They just aren't > physical enough. OK but here is the last sentence to the article I was reading spoken by David Deutsh : "I'm sure that quantum theory will be proved false one day, because it seems inconceivable that we've stumbled across the final theory of physics. But I would bet my bottom dollar that the new theory will either retain the parallel universe feature of quantum physics, or it will contain something even more weird" ###### Message-ID: <3B7C064A.35B4AE66@home.com> From: Suzanne Organization: @Home Network X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en]C-AtHome0405 (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) References: <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 204 Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:50:46 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.64.59.86 X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net X-Trace: news2.rdc1.ab.home.com 997984246 24.64.59.86 (Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:50:46 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 10:50:46 PDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!kanja.arnes.si!news-hub.siol.net!feed.cgocable.net!cyclone2.usenetserver.com!usenetserver.com!newsfeed1.cidera.com!Cidera!netnews.com!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!news2.rdc1.ab.home.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70336 Craig Shillington wrote: > Hi Lorz > > > > "Janice" wrote in message > > news:MPG.15e48010d3416f36989a3e@news.starlinx.com... > > > In article <9bxe7.1068$0M1.15950@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com>, > > > lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > > > > > > > "Janice" wrote in message > > > > news:MPG.15e45db3a17b6e1d989a3b@news.starlinx.com... > > > > > > > > In article <3B7A0F22.F7411C3E@ozemu.com>, scrappy1@ozemu.com says... > > > > > > > > > > > > IMO, dreams and OBE's may be experiences viewed using the same > > > > > > input. Just that during dreams, our physical thought processes > > > > > > battle with our conscious mind and we wake knowing nothing of > > > > > > interaction with the astral. The brain/mind/ego battle is won by the > > > > > > physical and the dream is passed off as nothing more than something > > > > > > we do when we sleep. When we have an OBE ... the fully conscious > > > > > > mind is kept at the front of the equation, much like in a LD ... > > > > > > only we know now that we are not dreaming .... that we are fully > > > > > > aware we are having a real alternate experience in which the input > > > > > > we are getting is based, not only on our own thoughts, but on some > > > > > > other external stimuli. I can't explain this properly ... I really > > > > > > think you can only have experienced all three .... OBE's, LD's and > > > > > > dreams to understand how I come to my conclusions of *knowing* when > > > > > > I am dreaming or not. > > > > > > > > > > Or maybe not even then ... :) I mean, I've had plenty of LDs that > > seem > > > > > pretty realistic and stable, enough so that they can give the > > impression > > > > > of occuring in other realities, but I still think of them as dreams. > > I > > > > > don't call an experience a dream only when it responds easily to my > > > > > thoughts, like one I had recently in which I could just think about > > > > > creating a horse and there it would be, or keep changing the colors of > > > > > items by thought. It was so easy that even other dream characters > > were > > > > > claiming to control the dream. :) The downside was that the very > > > > > instability that made this possible meant that these directed changes > > > > > didn't last long--horses would morph into unrecognizable beasts and > > > > > colors would spastically change on their own. Anyway, few of my LDs > > are > > > > > that extreme in terms of their sensitivity to my thoughts. My OBEs > > tend > > > > > to be more stable than that and my lucidity tends to be on the high > > side > > > > > in them but I can also have comparatively stable, high-lucidity LDs > > that > > > > > don't feature the OBE-type transition at the beginning so for me it's > > > > > hard to see a significant, constant difference between the two > > > > > experiences. Sometimes I favor the term "superlucid dream" to > > describe > > > > > the most lucid of LDs as well as OBEs. To fantasize a bit, I would > > > > > imagine that if there are such things as astral worlds it wouldn't > > much > > > > > matter whether you have (or remember having) an OBE-type transition > > when > > > > > you fall asleep to get to them. The important thing would be how > > > > > directly you access their input, minimizing the distorting input from > > > > > your own mind (which is not just your thoughts by any means); and that > > > > > should theoretically be possible even in a regular lucid dream if your > > > > > lucidity level is or becomes high enough. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > So, in other words, the difference between what we call LD and OOBE is > > the > > > > level of lucidity achieved? What makes this level of lucidity happen > > though > > > > do you think? Just dumb luck? (or unluck in the scary cases) > > > > > > I think you have a better chance of getting a high level of lucidity in > > > the typical OBE than in the typical lucid dream because the typical OBE > > > happens before you fall deeply asleep. Your brain hasn't been giving > > > itself a long acetylcholine bath while holding back on the serotonin etc. > > > yet. :) > > > > > > > Do some of us have a benign 'flaw' in our brains that stops what is > > supposed > > > > to happen so that we occassionaly have these spontaneous experiences > > where > > > > we are aware of what is happenign and "feel" totally awake and aware > > when we > > > > are actually sleeping? > > > > > > You could say that. As I've mentioned I think it's a matter of a largely > > > unpredictable timing discrepancy. There are various brain systems, the > > > changes in which have to be coordinated in the process of falling asleep > > > and waking up, a process which is controlled by the brainstem. If the > > > parts of your brain that are involved in consciousness, thinking and so > > > on happen to remain highly activated while other parts such as your motor > > > system are sent into sleep mode then you'll experience the anomaly of a > > > highly conscious sleep onset. > > > > > > > That's the thing that gets me still. The "feeling" of being totally > > awake > > > > and aware in OOBE that seems unlike a typical lucid dream. The level of > > > > lucidity in OOBE seems more than a dream. > > > > I think I understand all that logically but when it is happening and I > > am > > > > sitting there saying" this is real"and " I am definitely awake and > > aware" , > > > > it *is* real and I *am* awake and aware, aren't I? > > > > In a different way then the normal everyday awake/aware self but > > awake/aware > > > > just the same it seems. > > > > > > I think you're quite aware. "Awake" is more questionable. In some ways > > > you (or your body if you prefer) are asleep. You've got that paralysis > > > going, for instance, which is a normal part of REM sleep. > > > > > > > OK but my body is very different from my mind, no? The body is asleep but > > not the mind then? Then *I* am awake? *I* am my mind more than my body even, > > no? There is no *me* without my mind. My whole body could be paralyzed in an > > accident and I would still be there in mind. Awake and aware even though > > certain parts of my brain and spine perhaps have been damaged and I can not > > move my limbs. I still *am*. I am aware and awake. I know we have gone > > through this awake/aware thing before but I'm still trying to grasp this. To > > me it seems I am simply awake and aware regardless of whether the stages of > > my *body* sleeping are in effect. If I am very aware of the SP then I am > > awake. The tricky part is this "double body" stuff. Is it created out of > > the neccessity to leave my SP body or is it me allowing my *mind* to travel? > > IMO, we don't need to *seperate* or have a *body* at all. It more a > shift in our perception of our state of consciousness at the time. I think I would have to agree with this statement. Separation is a convenient term to help us deal with the idea that we *can* astral travel. We are such *literal* beings sometimes. I have been accused of being to literal at times. > > We *seperate* because as physical beings we need something with > which to show us we have *moved* somewhere else, even though I don't > think we *move* at all. > The astral body is the same .... as physical > beings, if we had no body, we would be dead physically .... so we > give ourselves a *body*, maybe more as a comfort thing than anything > else. Absolutely. The body isn't really necessary as consciousness doesn't require one. > Honestly ... I don't think there is any need to *leave the > body*, I think our mind isn't confined to the human body anyway. > > > Now getting even more woo-woo..... perhaps if my mind can travel it goes > > quantum time traveling which could explain the differences in bed position > > or windows etc. > > The "other place" could be a duplicate place but things > > rearranged a bit. Our other selves may have the bed by the window rather > > than the door. > > You may also be sensing wrongly, not interpreting the information > you have perceived correctly back here in the physical. You may also > wish to move your bed to another position in the physical so this > shows up in the astral counterpart. Interesting idea. I never thought of that. > You may be viewing a time in the > past or the future while OOB. I didn't think of that either. > You may be using peripheral vision > during an OBE and not being able to interpret where objects are in > *reality* due to this. There are many, many reasons things appear to > be different than what they are here in the physical. These are very good points. Thanks for pointing that out. I've had slight worries about the changes of furniture, etc, mostly because there is a tendency to invalidate the whole experience. Fortunately, I've learned from my own experiences that sometimes things are the same, and sometimes different. When they are different, I usually tend to think that I'm experiencing a lower level of lucidity. > Don't get hung > up on them. Sure ... note that this happens ... but don't spend all > your energy trying to explain it to yourself just now. Enjoy your > experiences and see if you can learn anything from them. > > > Can you tell I just read an article on quantum theory? (September issue of > > Discover just came..lol) > > I can now. ;) > > Craig > -- > The sure way to make a thing impossible- > -is to think it so. --- Franklin > -- > > alt.out-of-body Sign in List > http://out-of-body.tripod.com/signin.html > > Janice's alt.out-of-body Homepage > http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### From: Craig Shillington Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 04:42:40 +1000 Organization: Deja Vous Lines: 97 Message-ID: <3B7C1420.A0A32903@ozemu.com> References: <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com> <3B7C064A.35B4AE66@home.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp62.horsham.ozemu.com (203.24.252.62) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 997987666 9636899 203.24.252.62 (16 [27978]) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,ja Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!ppp62.horsham.ozemu.COM!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70341 Hi Suzanne, > > > > IMO, we don't need to *seperate* or have a *body* at all. It more a > > shift in our perception of our state of consciousness at the time. > > I think I would have to agree with this statement. Separation is a convenient > term to help us deal with the idea that we *can* astral travel. We are such > *literal* beings sometimes. I have been accused of being to literal at times. Oh for sure, the way I look at it is like this: all our time spend talking, reading and contemplating OBE's and our experiences is taking place in a reality which is very different to that which we are trying to convey, and in doing so a lot of information and experience is misinterpreted ... or simply cannot be interpreted using physical means. We may not even fully understand what we have experienced simply because we are in a physical state and cannot understand the concepts we are trying to deal with. So we make do with what we have and what we do know as best we can. > > We *seperate* because as physical beings we need something with > > which to show us we have *moved* somewhere else, even though I don't > > think we *move* at all. > > > The astral body is the same .... as physical > > beings, if we had no body, we would be dead physically .... so we > > give ourselves a *body*, maybe more as a comfort thing than anything > > else. > > Absolutely. The body isn't really necessary as consciousness doesn't require one. Oh ..... I think I like you and you ideas. :) > > Honestly ... I don't think there is any need to *leave the > > body*, I think our mind isn't confined to the human body anyway. > > > > > Now getting even more woo-woo..... perhaps if my mind can travel it goes > > > quantum time traveling which could explain the differences in bed position > > > or windows etc. > > > The "other place" could be a duplicate place but things > > > rearranged a bit. Our other selves may have the bed by the window rather > > > than the door. > > > > You may also be sensing wrongly, not interpreting the information > > you have perceived correctly back here in the physical. You may also > > wish to move your bed to another position in the physical so this > > shows up in the astral counterpart. > > Interesting idea. I never thought of that. > > > You may be viewing a time in the > > past or the future while OOB. > > I didn't think of that either. > > > You may be using peripheral vision > > during an OBE and not being able to interpret where objects are in > > *reality* due to this. There are many, many reasons things appear to > > be different than what they are here in the physical. > > These are very good points. Thanks for pointing that out. I've had slight > worries about the changes of furniture, etc, mostly because there is a tendency to > invalidate the whole experience. Fortunately, I've learned from my own > experiences that sometimes things are the same, and sometimes different. When > they are different, I usually tend to think that I'm experiencing a lower level of > lucidity. I'm not suggesting though, that these experiences may not also be some function of the brain or that they are real and we do actually get out in some other counterpart of physical reality in which things are different. For what I've experienced and understand of my own experiences, my opinion points more readily towards some of the examples I've pointed out. Until we know for sure ... I'll keep speculating the way I do, always open to any suggestions and willing to keep an open mind that even if my mind is playing tricks; at least I can play along with the tricks and learn wonderful things about myself. Until then, I have experienced too many things personally to prove to me that I interact outside the realm that is *me* and gather information outside of my personal being. That shows me there is more to this than just games inside my head. :) Craig -- The sure way to make a thing impossible- -is to think it so. --- Franklin -- alt.out-of-body Sign in List http://out-of-body.tripod.com/signin.html Janice's alt.out-of-body Homepage http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### From: Janice Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Message-ID: References: <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 43 NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 16:01:12 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv3-dlwIy5AfLR/7+Mx2gh17dx7JV2TRP6cnbA7cgn75ykt2RfXKg9B2PjsHGrBHKy6l/YGsj/7XNlbJ6xo!txTSNTbb+lmGkTkVBHiD8O1OSB/Uvti/QMHsKLKmlg1cZJejUYLxjLoKhAFHEtoBJZvdyKSeqdue!1aECRljcUw== X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html 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, 16 Aug 2001 17:04:49 -0400 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!nf3.bellglobal.com!border1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news6.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70408 In article <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com>, scrappy1@ozemu.com says... > > > In article <9bxe7.1068$0M1.15950@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com>, > > > lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > Now getting even more woo-woo..... perhaps if my mind can travel it goes > > quantum time traveling which could explain the differences in bed position > > or windows etc. > > The "other place" could be a duplicate place but things > > rearranged a bit. Our other selves may have the bed by the window rather > > than the door. > > You may also be sensing wrongly, not interpreting the information > you have perceived correctly back here in the physical. You may also > wish to move your bed to another position in the physical so this > shows up in the astral counterpart. On the assumption that "astral counterpart" is approximately congruent to "dream world" then certainly wishes and other psychological influences could plausibly affect the way the room looks. Another example would be memories, recent and long-term, blending together. I still get false awakenings that place me in my previous house, for instance. > You may be viewing a time in the > past or the future while OOB. You may be using peripheral vision > during an OBE and not being able to interpret where objects are in > *reality* due to this. There are many, many reasons things appear to > be different than what they are here in the physical. Don't get hung > up on them. Sure ... note that this happens ... but don't spend all > your energy trying to explain it to yourself just now. Enjoy your > experiences and see if you can learn anything from them. Can't argue with that, although for some reason I seem to have learned different things from them than most people here ... -- It's always darkest just before it goes pitch black.--Despair, Inc. My homepage: http://sites.netscape.net/jayavogelsong/ The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### From: Ian H Spedding Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 22:56:52 +0100 Message-ID: References: X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 NNTP-Posting-Host: host213-123-47-168.dialup.lineone.co.uk X-Trace: 16 Aug 2001 22:53:44 +0100, host213-123-47-168.dialup.lineone.co.uk Lines: 32 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!pinatubo.switch.ch!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!colt.net!shale.ftech.net!news.ftech.net!dispose.news.demon.net!demon!mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com!host213-123-47-168.dialup.lineone.co.uk Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70373 In article , crystal0wl@yahoo.com says... > Snip> > > Still kinda makes ya wonder why dream at all? Why doesn't that just get shut > > down as well? > > > Snippered too LOL > > I think Dreaming is a necessity for us. It's our minds way of dealing > with the events of the day/week/whatever we are going through at the > time. Dreams are very symbolic and can be interpreted. Kind of like > your own Spiritual Counselor in the subconcious. I have my doubts about this. It sounds too much like seeing the face of Jesus in a cloud formation or that the stars form constellations in the night sky. We see patterns in what are random events because that is what our brains are always trying to do in order to make sense of the world. My experience of my own dreams suggests that, at best, they are expressions of my underlying emotional state around that time, nothing more. Ian -- Ian H Spedding --------------------------------------------------- The meaning of the world is the separation of wish and fact. KURT GODEL ###### From: Janice Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Message-ID: References: X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 168 NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:07:54 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv3-bw4cpiUf1/k8zw4tv/E2Z0nN8ADr5qTensj2Xw3I9Hw9PxcTGIfSssAe+lXNrMM/FjdL5AhlQXAWM3W!h611KuymDnbuZR92rzdtIt2agG/t62ihNsjQycZv3OWBFCOhyERQjqI4pyLDlfFTwsHPD4kM6xSU!sGovsVcr2w== X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html 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, 16 Aug 2001 18:11:30 -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-stu1.dfn.de!news-mue1.dfn.de!news-was.dfn.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!nf3.bellglobal.com!border1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news6.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70389 In article , lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > "Janice" wrote in message > news:MPG.15e4bf90891120c8989a45@news.starlinx.com... > > In article , > > lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > > But these aspects that seem to be asleep seem to be just physical ones > to > > > me. > > > > "Just" physical? > > Well parts of the brain 'turn off' so to speak but doesn't seem like your > mind ever sleeps so wouldn't that leave the physical? Your mind goes into a pretty low ebb in certain phases of sleep, as far as can be judged from collecting mentation reports from people just woken up from deep sleep etc., and it's usually not all that bright even during dreaming, since it can't even properly register blatant absurdities, false memories and so on. LDs/OBEs are anomalies suggesting that sometimes, for whatever reason, the brain doesn't subdue support for higher-level conscious functioning during dream sleep. I guess I'm not clear on what you're getting at. Are you just speculating that maybe consciousness has a separate existence from the physical and is the "real you"? > I meant form a physical body in the sense of a "astral" body in our mind to > feel more comfortable with the traveling. > > > > I don't know anyone who manifest physical > > matter around them. If you mean do you form the shape of a physical body > > in OBEs because you're used to having a body, then yeah, that's basically > > what I said--it forms out of habit. > > Right, but I meant form the shape of a physical body even if your OBE was > truly your mind traveling rather than it being a type of LD. OK, I *think* I see where you're headed. When you question whether an OBE should be considered a type of LD what really concerns you is whether calling it an LD would mean that the OBE must then be considered subjective and self-created? Well, it's undeniably my working assumption that this is true of both LDs and OBEs, but even if that assumption is wrong in whole or in part I still think they are essentially the same phenomenon. There are people who think they access other worlds, spirit guides and so on in lucid dreams so by no means does "dream" equate to "unreal experience" for everyone. Therefore even from a "woo-woo" perspective I don't think there would be any great injustice done in equating the two experiences. > > > > So (speaking of my own visits to these "other realities" similar to my > > > > real location) how is it that the details of the place can change when > > > > you look away then back? > > > > > > Maybe you're flipping around all the alternate realities? Because you > are in > > > an area where you can somehow interact within them all? > > > > But why do I have to divert my attention like that? They should be able > > to switch right before my eyes, no? > > True but maybe because you aren't practiced enough to do it that way just > yet. Just like when we all have different techniques of going OBE. Whatever > works, ya know? > > > > > Why is it that glass doesn't break easily > > > > there? Why don't the light switches work? Why are the walls so > flimsy > > > > you can break them apart? Why are the locks so bad that you can just > > > > pull a locked door open? Why do I reflect differently in the mirror > than > > > > I appear when I look at my clothes etc.? > > > > > > Because in this place that all alternate realities are overlapping some > > > doors are unlocked, some are locked, > > > > It's not that they are unlocked, it's that the doorknobs are non- > > functional; you don't have to turn them. Why should they be non- > > functional in virtually every "reality" that Ruth and I have tested > > except waking reality? (She's the one who taught me that trick.) > > > > > some switches work, some don't, > > > > Hardly a single one does. That's a bit suspicious, wouldn't you say? In > > my real house they work vastly more often than not. Is it only possible > > to reach an alternate reality when the power fails there? Hey, I handed you one there and you didn't take it. You could have said that maybe electromagnetic fields interfere with making quantum leaps ... :) > > > your > > > hair is long in some, in some not, etc...? > > > > So the mirrors are portals to worlds other than the one my dream/astral > > body is in? Because I'll be wearing one thing on my dream/astral body > > and another thing in the mirror image. > > > > Could be ;) Then why don't mirrors here act as portals? I think it's a pretty raw deal that everybody in the other quantum realities gets magic stuff and we don't. > > > > And why do the people there > > > > talk and act like idiots? > > > > > > Some alternate people are so advanced they just appear to be idiots to > you? > > > And then some are just idiots? > > > > They would be too stupid to build houses, even houses with no > > electricity. And no version of me would marry a version of Jay who > > clacks and gibbers and rolls his eyes like an imp ... no wait ... maybe > > ... ;) > > > > Well ok, maybe we get interference with memories of our present life so our > mind tries to create that person there and fails to do so very well. It would be difficult to do that in a physical world, no? So maybe we're not visiting other quantum physical universes in these "not-quite-my- house" experiences after all, but experiencing a dimension where our minds create images and influence/distort what we perceive? Well, that's more reasonable to me. I just think of it as the dream world rather than the astral plane. > > > ;) Ya think? I don't know the answers. We can only speculate but it > was > > > the best I could come up with right now. lol > > > > I may have to send you to the dungeon again. > > Nooooooooooo not the dungeon. I already can sense (call it ESP if you like) > pz's eyes rolling and hear his wicked cackling at me in this thread! So you've internalized His Malevolence? Well, since you're carrying your own portable torturer around in a pocket of your psyche then maybe I won't send you to the dungeon. > > At this point I would start > > believing the astral realm hypothesis before I would start believing I > > was visiting alternate physical realms in OBEs. They just aren't > > physical enough. > > OK but here is the last sentence to the article I was reading spoken by > David Deutsh : > > "I'm sure that quantum theory will be proved false one day, because it seems > inconceivable that we've stumbled across the final theory of physics. But I > would bet my bottom dollar that the new theory will either retain the > parallel universe feature of quantum physics, or it will contain something > even more weird" Oh, great. :) -- It's always darkest just before it goes pitch black.--Despair, Inc. My homepage: http://sites.netscape.net/jayavogelsong/ The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### Message-ID: <3B7C6558.85F63A22@home.com> From: Suzanne Organization: @Home Network X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en]C-AtHome0405 (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) References: <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com> <3B7C064A.35B4AE66@home.com> <3B7C1420.A0A32903@ozemu.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 133 Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 00:36:23 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.64.59.86 X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net X-Trace: news2.rdc1.ab.home.com 998008583 24.64.59.86 (Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:36:23 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:36:23 PDT 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.augsburg.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newshub2.home.com!news.home.com!news2.rdc1.ab.home.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70439 Craig Shillington wrote: > Hi Suzanne, > > > > > > > > > IMO, we don't need to *seperate* or have a *body* at all. It more a > > > shift in our perception of our state of consciousness at the time. > > > > I think I would have to agree with this statement. Separation is a convenient > > term to help us deal with the idea that we *can* astral travel. We are such > > *literal* beings sometimes. I have been accused of being to literal at times. > > Oh for sure, the way I look at it is like this: all our time spend > talking, reading and contemplating OBE's and our experiences is > taking place in a reality which is very different to that which we > are trying to convey, and in doing so a lot of information and > experience is misinterpreted ... or simply cannot be interpreted > using physical means. I find this to be one of my biggest frustrations in life. It is not easy to convey something abstract in literal english (or the like). It's like asking a group of students to write an expository essay on an abstract painting. Each student would have a different view. (It would be an interesting experiment though.) > We may not even fully understand what we have > experienced simply because we are in a physical state and cannot > understand the concepts we are trying to deal with. So we make do > with what we have and what we do know as best we can. Yep. > > > > > We *seperate* because as physical beings we need something with > > > which to show us we have *moved* somewhere else, even though I don't > > > think we *move* at all. > > > > > The astral body is the same .... as physical > > > beings, if we had no body, we would be dead physically .... so we > > > give ourselves a *body*, maybe more as a comfort thing than anything > > > else. > > > > Absolutely. The body isn't really necessary as consciousness doesn't require one. > > Oh ..... I think I like you and you ideas. :) *blushing* I equally like your ideas. :-) > > > > > Honestly ... I don't think there is any need to *leave the > > > body*, I think our mind isn't confined to the human body anyway. > > > > > > > Now getting even more woo-woo..... perhaps if my mind can travel it goes > > > > quantum time traveling which could explain the differences in bed position > > > > or windows etc. > > > > The "other place" could be a duplicate place but things > > > > rearranged a bit. Our other selves may have the bed by the window rather > > > > than the door. > > > > > > You may also be sensing wrongly, not interpreting the information > > > you have perceived correctly back here in the physical. You may also > > > wish to move your bed to another position in the physical so this > > > shows up in the astral counterpart. > > > > Interesting idea. I never thought of that. > > > > > You may be viewing a time in the > > > past or the future while OOB. > > > > I didn't think of that either. > > > > > You may be using peripheral vision > > > during an OBE and not being able to interpret where objects are in > > > *reality* due to this. There are many, many reasons things appear to > > > be different than what they are here in the physical. > > > > These are very good points. Thanks for pointing that out. I've had slight > > worries about the changes of furniture, etc, mostly because there is a tendency to > > invalidate the whole experience. Fortunately, I've learned from my own > > experiences that sometimes things are the same, and sometimes different. When > > they are different, I usually tend to think that I'm experiencing a lower level of > > lucidity. > > I'm not suggesting though, that these experiences may not also be > some function of the brain or that they are real and we do actually > get out in some other counterpart of physical reality in which > things are different. > For what I've experienced and understand of my > own experiences, my opinion points more readily towards some of the > examples I've pointed out. Until we know for sure ... I'll keep > speculating the way I do, always open to any suggestions and willing > to keep an open mind that even if my mind is playing tricks; at > least I can play along with the tricks and learn wonderful things > about myself. Absolutely! Nothing is more important to me than evolving my own consciousness and always maintaining an open/curious mind. > Until then, I have experienced too many things > personally to prove to me that I interact outside the realm that is > *me* and gather information outside of my personal being. That shows > me there is more to this than just games inside my head. :) Me too. > > > Craig > -- > The sure way to make a thing impossible- > -is to think it so. --- Franklin > -- > > alt.out-of-body Sign in List > http://out-of-body.tripod.com/signin.html > > Janice's alt.out-of-body Homepage > http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html -- If you're looking to find the key to the Universe, I have some bad news and some good news. The bad news is: there is no key to the Universe. The good news is: it has been left unlocked. - by Swami Beyondananda ###### From: Janice Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Message-ID: References: <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com> <3B7C064A.35B4AE66@home.com> <3B7C1420.A0A32903@ozemu.com> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 28 NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 20:41:54 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv3-g76RN/CsxHXBTD0gCFuRE4HSPuvziBOaOptPUNS08Rcec+5yXZQTcnDOMYMTNCtcO+9e+3WYfiIZKY7!Lr/o0CxnwKym1M06p+HWuwBMW19cF2iBcm8YHjJsiRluhtrkVyLceIzv1U3D4SzHmjHijPTIgmu6!eWc7bVupag== X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html 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, 16 Aug 2001 21:45:30 -0400 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news-fra1.dfn.de!news-lei1.dfn.de!news-nue1.dfn.de!uni-erlangen.de!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!news.stealth.net!207.35.177.252.MISMATCH!nf3.bellglobal.com!border1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news6.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70386 In article <3B7C1420.A0A32903@ozemu.com>, scrappy1@ozemu.com says... > > I'm not suggesting though, that these experiences may not also be > some function of the brain or that they are real and we do actually > get out in some other counterpart of physical reality in which > things are different. For what I've experienced and understand of my > own experiences, my opinion points more readily towards some of the > examples I've pointed out. Until we know for sure ... I'll keep > speculating the way I do, always open to any suggestions and willing > to keep an open mind that even if my mind is playing tricks; at > least I can play along with the tricks and learn wonderful things > about myself. Until then, I have experienced too many things > personally to prove to me that I interact outside the realm that is > *me* and gather information outside of my personal being. That shows > me there is more to this than just games inside my head. :) Have you done particularly better at what seems to be gathering verifiable information by extra-physical means in OBEs than you have in regular dreams, or in waking life? -- It's always darkest just before it goes pitch black.--Despair, Inc. My homepage: http://sites.netscape.net/jayavogelsong/ The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### From: Craig Shillington Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 23:52:18 +1000 Organization: Deja Vous Lines: 149 Message-ID: <3B7E7312.D72BB3BD@ozemu.com> References: <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com> <3B7C064A.35B4AE66@home.com> <3B7C1420.A0A32903@ozemu.com> <3B7C6558.85F63A22@home.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp90.horsham.ozemu.com (203.24.252.90) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 998144967 10469763 203.24.252.90 (16 [27978]) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,ja Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!ppp90.horsham.ozemu.COM!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70462 Hi Suzanne, > > Craig Shillington wrote: > > > Hi Suzanne, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IMO, we don't need to *seperate* or have a *body* at all. It more a > > > > shift in our perception of our state of consciousness at the time. > > > > > > I think I would have to agree with this statement. Separation is a convenient > > > term to help us deal with the idea that we *can* astral travel. We are such > > > *literal* beings sometimes. I have been accused of being to literal at times. > > > > Oh for sure, the way I look at it is like this: all our time spend > > talking, reading and contemplating OBE's and our experiences is > > taking place in a reality which is very different to that which we > > are trying to convey, and in doing so a lot of information and > > experience is misinterpreted ... or simply cannot be interpreted > > using physical means. > > I find this to be one of my biggest frustrations in life. It is not easy to convey > something abstract in literal english (or the like). It's like asking a group of > students to write an expository essay on an abstract painting. Each student would have > a different view. (It would be an interesting experiment though.) Actually, you've brought up another very important point, IMO. Not only are we trying to convey an experience that can't really be conveyed in terms we use here and now .... these experiences are also open to the interpretation of the the person having the experience. In that I mean; when one person may report they see the Virgin Mary on a pure white cloud, another may report seeing a long lost relative in a brilliant white light ... etc. etc. Dependent, IMO, on that persons belief system and past experiences (here and OOB). > > > We may not even fully understand what we have > > experienced simply because we are in a physical state and cannot > > understand the concepts we are trying to deal with. So we make do > > with what we have and what we do know as best we can. > > Yep. > > > > > > > > > We *seperate* because as physical beings we need something with > > > > which to show us we have *moved* somewhere else, even though I don't > > > > think we *move* at all. > > > > > > > The astral body is the same .... as physical > > > > beings, if we had no body, we would be dead physically .... so we > > > > give ourselves a *body*, maybe more as a comfort thing than anything > > > > else. > > > > > > Absolutely. The body isn't really necessary as consciousness doesn't require one. > > > > Oh ..... I think I like you and you ideas. :) > > *blushing* I equally like your ideas. :-) VBS ... well ... I think we are going to have some very interesting discussions in the future then. :) But .... I liked your ideas first. :Þ > > > > > > > > Honestly ... I don't think there is any need to *leave the > > > > body*, I think our mind isn't confined to the human body anyway. > > > > > > > > > Now getting even more woo-woo..... perhaps if my mind can travel it goes > > > > > quantum time traveling which could explain the differences in bed position > > > > > or windows etc. > > > > > The "other place" could be a duplicate place but things > > > > > rearranged a bit. Our other selves may have the bed by the window rather > > > > > than the door. > > > > > > > > You may also be sensing wrongly, not interpreting the information > > > > you have perceived correctly back here in the physical. You may also > > > > wish to move your bed to another position in the physical so this > > > > shows up in the astral counterpart. > > > > > > Interesting idea. I never thought of that. > > > > > > > You may be viewing a time in the > > > > past or the future while OOB. > > > > > > I didn't think of that either. > > > > > > > You may be using peripheral vision > > > > during an OBE and not being able to interpret where objects are in > > > > *reality* due to this. There are many, many reasons things appear to > > > > be different than what they are here in the physical. > > > > > > These are very good points. Thanks for pointing that out. I've had slight > > > worries about the changes of furniture, etc, mostly because there is a tendency to > > > invalidate the whole experience. Fortunately, I've learned from my own > > > experiences that sometimes things are the same, and sometimes different. When > > > they are different, I usually tend to think that I'm experiencing a lower level of > > > lucidity. > > > > I'm not suggesting though, that these experiences may not also be > > some function of the brain or that they are real and we do actually > > get out in some other counterpart of physical reality in which > > things are different. > > > For what I've experienced and understand of my > > own experiences, my opinion points more readily towards some of the > > examples I've pointed out. Until we know for sure ... I'll keep > > speculating the way I do, always open to any suggestions and willing > > to keep an open mind that even if my mind is playing tricks; at > > least I can play along with the tricks and learn wonderful things > > about myself. > > Absolutely! Nothing is more important to me than evolving my own consciousness and > always maintaining an open/curious mind. I don't like to be wrong ... but i'd be the first to admit I was if evidence was shown to change my mind. I am equally open minded to the fact that these experiences *may* be all a part of my mind .... it works both ways. It's just a pity we need to express an opinion here ... then back it up saying that it's an opinion. If others were as open minded as they say they are ... they would understand all to well the language we speak to each other here. > > Until then, I have experienced too many things > > personally to prove to me that I interact outside the realm that is > > *me* and gather information outside of my personal being. That shows > > me there is more to this than just games inside my head. :) > > Me too. Craig -- The sure way to make a thing impossible- -is to think it so. --- Franklin -- alt.out-of-body Sign in List http://out-of-body.tripod.com/signin.html Janice's alt.out-of-body Homepage http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### From: Craig Shillington Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2001 00:01:57 +1000 Organization: Deja Vous Lines: 47 Message-ID: <3B7E7555.E6B21A2@ozemu.com> References: <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com> <3B7C064A.35B4AE66@home.com> <3B7C1420.A0A32903@ozemu.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp90.horsham.ozemu.com (203.24.252.90) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 998144977 10469763 203.24.252.90 (16 [27978]) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,ja 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!uni-berlin.de!ppp90.horsham.ozemu.COM!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70489 Janice wrote: > > In article <3B7C1420.A0A32903@ozemu.com>, scrappy1@ozemu.com says... > > > > I'm not suggesting though, that these experiences may not also be > > some function of the brain or that they are real and we do actually > > get out in some other counterpart of physical reality in which > > things are different. For what I've experienced and understand of my > > own experiences, my opinion points more readily towards some of the > > examples I've pointed out. Until we know for sure ... I'll keep > > speculating the way I do, always open to any suggestions and willing > > to keep an open mind that even if my mind is playing tricks; at > > least I can play along with the tricks and learn wonderful things > > about myself. Until then, I have experienced too many things > > personally to prove to me that I interact outside the realm that is > > *me* and gather information outside of my personal being. That shows > > me there is more to this than just games inside my head. :) > > Have you done particularly better at what seems to be gathering > verifiable information by extra-physical means in OBEs than you have in > regular dreams, or in waking life? I'm not sure what you are asking here? I was just stating that I *HAVE* gathered verifiable info whilst OOB ... which shows *me* that it is possible. The way I gathered the information during the OBE was in no way different than what I would have done if I was physical ... I walked around and looked at things and made notes of particular things and recorded them for verification upon returning to the physical. (With the exception of interpreting an emotional state during the OBE ... ) I wouldn't say I had done better or worse .... the opportunity was presented to me so I took it. Craig -- The sure way to make a thing impossible- -is to think it so. --- Franklin -- alt.out-of-body Sign in List http://out-of-body.tripod.com/signin.html Janice's alt.out-of-body Homepage http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### From: Craig Shillington Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2001 00:09:06 +1000 Organization: Deja Vous Lines: 75 Message-ID: <3B7E7702.7D724961@ozemu.com> References: <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp90.horsham.ozemu.com (203.24.252.90) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 998144985 10469763 203.24.252.90 (16 [27978]) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,ja Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!ppp90.horsham.ozemu.COM!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70490 Janice wrote: > > In article <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com>, scrappy1@ozemu.com says... > > > > > In article <9bxe7.1068$0M1.15950@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com>, > > > > lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > > > Now getting even more woo-woo..... perhaps if my mind can travel it goes > > > quantum time traveling which could explain the differences in bed position > > > or windows etc. > > > The "other place" could be a duplicate place but things > > > rearranged a bit. Our other selves may have the bed by the window rather > > > than the door. > > > > You may also be sensing wrongly, not interpreting the information > > you have perceived correctly back here in the physical. You may also > > wish to move your bed to another position in the physical so this > > shows up in the astral counterpart. > > On the assumption that "astral counterpart" is approximately congruent to > "dream world" My astral counterpart .... may be your dream world. I believe they may be made of the same material. > then certainly wishes and other psychological influences > could plausibly affect the way the room looks. Oh, for sure. :) The question is .... how do we tell what we are making up from what we have nothing to do with? Maybe we can't ... maybe we don't need to ... maybe we already know the answer to that while we are there. > Another example would be > memories, recent and long-term, blending together. I still get false > awakenings that place me in my previous house, for instance. I agree with what you are saying ... although all my FA's take place from where ever I lay sleeping. When you dream about dreaming ... do you always wake up in the dream where you started dreaming from Janice? > > You may be viewing a time in the > > past or the future while OOB. You may be using peripheral vision > > during an OBE and not being able to interpret where objects are in > > *reality* due to this. There are many, many reasons things appear to > > be different than what they are here in the physical. Don't get hung > > up on them. Sure ... note that this happens ... but don't spend all > > your energy trying to explain it to yourself just now. Enjoy your > > experiences and see if you can learn anything from them. > > Can't argue with that, although for some reason I seem to have learned > different things from them than most people here ... I guess we all learn from those things that are relevant to us at the time and from those things that interest us most .... or things that can effect us the greatest ..... Craig -- The sure way to make a thing impossible- -is to think it so. --- Franklin -- alt.out-of-body Sign in List http://out-of-body.tripod.com/signin.html Janice's alt.out-of-body Homepage http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### Message-ID: <3B7E94A1.A15CEF6@home.com> From: Suzanne Organization: @Home Network X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en]C-AtHome0405 (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) References: <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com> <3B7C064A.35B4AE66@home.com> <3B7C1420.A0A32903@ozemu.com> <3B7C6558.85F63A22@home.com> <3B7E7312.D72BB3BD@ozemu.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 157 Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 16:24:20 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.64.59.86 X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net X-Trace: news2.rdc1.ab.home.com 998151860 24.64.59.86 (Sat, 18 Aug 2001 09:24:20 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 09:24:20 PDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newshub2.home.com!news.home.com!news2.rdc1.ab.home.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70485 Craig Shillington wrote: > Hi Suzanne, > > > > Craig Shillington wrote: > > > > > Hi Suzanne, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IMO, we don't need to *seperate* or have a *body* at all. It more a > > > > > shift in our perception of our state of consciousness at the time. > > > > > > > > I think I would have to agree with this statement. Separation is a convenient > > > > term to help us deal with the idea that we *can* astral travel. We are such > > > > *literal* beings sometimes. I have been accused of being to literal at times. > > > > > > Oh for sure, the way I look at it is like this: all our time spend > > > talking, reading and contemplating OBE's and our experiences is > > > taking place in a reality which is very different to that which we > > > are trying to convey, and in doing so a lot of information and > > > experience is misinterpreted ... or simply cannot be interpreted > > > using physical means. > > > > I find this to be one of my biggest frustrations in life. It is not easy to convey > > something abstract in literal english (or the like). It's like asking a group of > > students to write an expository essay on an abstract painting. Each student would have > > a different view. (It would be an interesting experiment though.) > > Actually, you've brought up another very important point, IMO. Not > only are we trying to convey an experience that can't really be > conveyed in terms we use here and now .... these experiences are > also open to the interpretation of the the person having the > experience. In that I mean; when one person may report they see the > Virgin Mary on a pure white cloud, another may report seeing a long > lost relative in a brilliant white light ... etc. etc. Dependent, > IMO, on that persons belief system and past experiences (here and > OOB). You're definitely spot on. > > > > > > We may not even fully understand what we have > > > experienced simply because we are in a physical state and cannot > > > understand the concepts we are trying to deal with. So we make do > > > with what we have and what we do know as best we can. > > > > Yep. > > > > > > > > > > > > > We *seperate* because as physical beings we need something with > > > > > which to show us we have *moved* somewhere else, even though I don't > > > > > think we *move* at all. > > > > > > > > > The astral body is the same .... as physical > > > > > beings, if we had no body, we would be dead physically .... so we > > > > > give ourselves a *body*, maybe more as a comfort thing than anything > > > > > else. > > > > > > > > Absolutely. The body isn't really necessary as consciousness doesn't require one. > > > > > > Oh ..... I think I like you and you ideas. :) > > > > *blushing* I equally like your ideas. :-) > > VBS ... well ... I think we are going to have some very interesting > discussions in the future then. :) But .... I liked your ideas > first. :Þ Fine then. :-p > > > > > > > > > > > > > Honestly ... I don't think there is any need to *leave the > > > > > body*, I think our mind isn't confined to the human body anyway. > > > > > > > > > > > Now getting even more woo-woo..... perhaps if my mind can travel it goes > > > > > > quantum time traveling which could explain the differences in bed position > > > > > > or windows etc. > > > > > > The "other place" could be a duplicate place but things > > > > > > rearranged a bit. Our other selves may have the bed by the window rather > > > > > > than the door. > > > > > > > > > > You may also be sensing wrongly, not interpreting the information > > > > > you have perceived correctly back here in the physical. You may also > > > > > wish to move your bed to another position in the physical so this > > > > > shows up in the astral counterpart. > > > > > > > > Interesting idea. I never thought of that. > > > > > > > > > You may be viewing a time in the > > > > > past or the future while OOB. > > > > > > > > I didn't think of that either. > > > > > > > > > You may be using peripheral vision > > > > > during an OBE and not being able to interpret where objects are in > > > > > *reality* due to this. There are many, many reasons things appear to > > > > > be different than what they are here in the physical. > > > > > > > > These are very good points. Thanks for pointing that out. I've had slight > > > > worries about the changes of furniture, etc, mostly because there is a tendency to > > > > invalidate the whole experience. Fortunately, I've learned from my own > > > > experiences that sometimes things are the same, and sometimes different. When > > > > they are different, I usually tend to think that I'm experiencing a lower level of > > > > lucidity. > > > > > > I'm not suggesting though, that these experiences may not also be > > > some function of the brain or that they are real and we do actually > > > get out in some other counterpart of physical reality in which > > > things are different. > > > > > For what I've experienced and understand of my > > > own experiences, my opinion points more readily towards some of the > > > examples I've pointed out. Until we know for sure ... I'll keep > > > speculating the way I do, always open to any suggestions and willing > > > to keep an open mind that even if my mind is playing tricks; at > > > least I can play along with the tricks and learn wonderful things > > > about myself. > > > > Absolutely! Nothing is more important to me than evolving my own consciousness and > > always maintaining an open/curious mind. > > I don't like to be wrong ... but i'd be the first to admit I was if > evidence was shown to change my mind. Perhaps you should blame any future wrongs on some anomalous brainwave activity - that way you're in the clear. :-) > I am equally open minded to > the fact that these experiences *may* be all a part of my mind .... > it works both ways. That's the only part that I would have difficulty believing. However, if enough valid evidence was presented, I would consider it. The dissapointment would be huge though. > It's just a pity we need to express an opinion > here ... then back it up saying that it's an opinion. I don't know who made those rules, but I guess by way of default I'm playing by them too. > If others were > as open minded as they say they are ... they would understand all to > well the language we speak to each other here. Agreed. Suzanne ###### From: Janice Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 15:08:46 -0400 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Lines: 19 Message-ID: References: <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com> <3B7C064A.35B4AE66@home.com> <3B7C1420.A0A32903@ozemu.com> <3B7C6558.85F63A22@home.com> <3B7E7312.D72BB3BD@ozemu.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: async132.starlinx.com X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!pln-w!spln!dex!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!enews1 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70479 In article <3B7E7312.D72BB3BD@ozemu.com>, scrappy1@ozemu.com says... > I don't like to be wrong ... but i'd be the first to admit I was if > evidence was shown to change my mind. I am equally open minded to > the fact that these experiences *may* be all a part of my mind .... Or partly in your mind? Or sometimes all in your mind and sometimes not? Or all in the minds of some people but not other people? We tend to polarize on the "all self-generated" and "all completely real" options but those really aren't the only options. -- It's always darkest just before it goes pitch black.--Despair, Inc. My homepage: http://sites.netscape.net/jayavogelsong/ The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### From: Janice Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 15:19:26 -0400 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Lines: 52 Message-ID: References: <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com> <3B7C064A.35B4AE66@home.com> <3B7C1420.A0A32903@ozemu.com> <3B7E7555.E6B21A2@ozemu.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: async132.starlinx.com X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!kanja.arnes.si!news-hub.siol.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!pln-w!spln!dex!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!enews1 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70477 In article <3B7E7555.E6B21A2@ozemu.com>, scrappy1@ozemu.com says... > > > Janice wrote: > > > > In article <3B7C1420.A0A32903@ozemu.com>, scrappy1@ozemu.com says... > > > > > > I'm not suggesting though, that these experiences may not also be > > > some function of the brain or that they are real and we do actually > > > get out in some other counterpart of physical reality in which > > > things are different. For what I've experienced and understand of my > > > own experiences, my opinion points more readily towards some of the > > > examples I've pointed out. Until we know for sure ... I'll keep > > > speculating the way I do, always open to any suggestions and willing > > > to keep an open mind that even if my mind is playing tricks; at > > > least I can play along with the tricks and learn wonderful things > > > about myself. Until then, I have experienced too many things > > > personally to prove to me that I interact outside the realm that is > > > *me* and gather information outside of my personal being. That shows > > > me there is more to this than just games inside my head. :) > > > > Have you done particularly better at what seems to be gathering > > verifiable information by extra-physical means in OBEs than you have in > > regular dreams, or in waking life? > > I'm not sure what you are asking here? I was just stating that I > *HAVE* gathered verifiable info whilst OOB ... which shows *me* that > it is possible. The way I gathered the information during the OBE > was in no way different than what I would have done if I was > physical ... I walked around and looked at things and made notes of > particular things and recorded them for verification upon returning > to the physical. (With the exception of interpreting an emotional > state during the OBE ... ) I wouldn't say I had done better or worse > .... the opportunity was presented to me so I took it. What I'm getting at is that people have reported gathering information by extra-physical means in OBEs, in lucid dreams, in regular dreams, in hypnagogia, in meditative reveries, and even while awake, so when I consider paranormal rather than mundane explanations for such things it's easier for me to imagine that there might possibly be a "psi" faculty that can manifest under a variety of conditions rather than that OBEs are intrinsically paranormal events. I'm wondering if you personally seem to be better at this sort of thing in OBEs than in other states. -- It's always darkest just before it goes pitch black.--Despair, Inc. My homepage: http://sites.netscape.net/jayavogelsong/ The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### From: Janice Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 15:43:52 -0400 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Lines: 79 Message-ID: References: <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com> <3B7E7702.7D724961@ozemu.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: async132.starlinx.com X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news-fra1.dfn.de!fu-berlin.de!pln-w!spln!dex!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!enews1 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70480 In article <3B7E7702.7D724961@ozemu.com>, scrappy1@ozemu.com says... > > > Janice wrote: > > > > In article <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com>, scrappy1@ozemu.com says... > > > > > > > In article <9bxe7.1068$0M1.15950@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com>, > > > > > lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > > > > > Now getting even more woo-woo..... perhaps if my mind can travel it goes > > > > quantum time traveling which could explain the differences in bed position > > > > or windows etc. > > > > The "other place" could be a duplicate place but things > > > > rearranged a bit. Our other selves may have the bed by the window rather > > > > than the door. > > > > > > You may also be sensing wrongly, not interpreting the information > > > you have perceived correctly back here in the physical. You may also > > > wish to move your bed to another position in the physical so this > > > shows up in the astral counterpart. > > > > On the assumption that "astral counterpart" is approximately congruent to > > "dream world" > > My astral counterpart .... may be your dream world. I believe they > may be made of the same material. As Gunnar would say, astrons! :) > > then certainly wishes and other psychological influences > > could plausibly affect the way the room looks. > > Oh, for sure. :) The question is .... how do we tell what we are > making up from what we have nothing to do with? Maybe we can't ... > maybe we don't need to ... maybe we already know the answer to that > while we are there. We probably couldn't tell. Some have suggested that if you can control an image then it's self-generated, but suppose you only control your perception of the image? I've actually gotten into debates about this kind of thing with dream characters, LOL. > > Another example would be > > memories, recent and long-term, blending together. I still get false > > awakenings that place me in my previous house, for instance. > > I agree with what you are saying ... although all my FA's take place > from where ever I lay sleeping. Most of my false awakenings take place where they "should" but a sizeable number don't. My OBEs normally take place where I'm sleeping, but there was one time when I deliberately made the environment into my habitual one rather than the apartment where I was sleeping, by imagining that I was home and going through the actions of jumping out my bedroom window and moving through the driveway at home, so when the visuals came in clearly I was indeed in my regular OBE neighborhood. I've had some funny twists to OBEs as well, such as jumping out my bedroom window and ending up on the model train platform in the basement. :) > When you dream about dreaming ... do > you always wake up in the dream where you started dreaming from > Janice? Offhand I can't remember any dreams within dreams other than "OBEs" that I induce from false awakenings that I incorrectly assume are real awakenings--usually thinking, "Wow, that was easy!" and not questioning the absence of vibes and effort, LOL. ... -- It's always darkest just before it goes pitch black.--Despair, Inc. My homepage: http://sites.netscape.net/jayavogelsong/ The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### From: Janice Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2001 16:08:46 -0400 Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com Lines: 24 Message-ID: References: <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com> <3B7C064A.35B4AE66@home.com> <3B7C1420.A0A32903@ozemu.com> <3B7C6558.85F63A22@home.com> <3B7E7312.D72BB3BD@ozemu.com> <3B7E94A1.A15CEF6@home.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: async132.starlinx.com X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!209.155.233.16!pln-e!spln!dex!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!enews1 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70482 In article <3B7E94A1.A15CEF6@home.com>, staz755@home.com says... > > > Craig Shillington wrote: > > I am equally open minded to > > the fact that these experiences *may* be all a part of my mind .... > > it works both ways. > > That's the only part that I would have difficulty believing. However, if enough valid > evidence was presented, I would consider it. The dissapointment would be huge though. Really? Why is that? Wouldn't it be mind-blowing enough to think that your own imagination could create such amazing experiences? I think I'd rather have them be all mine--it's so ego-boosting! :D -- It's always darkest just before it goes pitch black.--Despair, Inc. My homepage: http://sites.netscape.net/jayavogelsong/ The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### From: "lorz" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body References: Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Lines: 226 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 Message-ID: X-Complaints-To: abuse@usenetserver.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. NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 09:09:58 EDT Organization: Bellsouth.Net Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 09:10:01 -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-stu1.dfn.de!news-koe1.dfn.de!news-was.dfn.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.frii.net!easynews!e420r-sjo4.usenetserver.com!usenetserver.com!e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70618 "Janice" wrote in message news:MPG.15e60f12bf9f5727989a55@news.starlinx.com... > In article , > lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > > > "Janice" wrote in message > > news:MPG.15e4bf90891120c8989a45@news.starlinx.com... > > > In article , > > > lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > > > > But these aspects that seem to be asleep seem to be just physical ones > > to > > > > me. > > > > > > "Just" physical? > > > > Well parts of the brain 'turn off' so to speak but doesn't seem like your > > mind ever sleeps so wouldn't that leave the physical? > > Your mind goes into a pretty low ebb in certain phases of sleep, as far > as can be judged from collecting mentation reports from people just woken > up from deep sleep etc., and it's usually not all that bright even during > dreaming, since it can't even properly register blatant absurdities, > false memories and so on. LDs/OBEs are anomalies suggesting that > sometimes, for whatever reason, the brain doesn't subdue support for > higher-level conscious functioning during dream sleep. > > I guess I'm not clear on what you're getting at. Are you just > speculating that maybe consciousness has a separate existence from the > physical and is the "real you"? Right. I was seeing if that could be made sense of. > > > I meant form a physical body in the sense of a "astral" body in our mind to > > feel more comfortable with the traveling. > > > > > > > I don't know anyone who manifest physical > > > matter around them. If you mean do you form the shape of a physical body > > > in OBEs because you're used to having a body, then yeah, that's basically > > > what I said--it forms out of habit. > > > > Right, but I meant form the shape of a physical body even if your OBE was > > truly your mind traveling rather than it being a type of LD. > > OK, I *think* I see where you're headed. When you question whether an > OBE should be considered a type of LD what really concerns you is whether > calling it an LD would mean that the OBE must then be considered > subjective and self-created? Well, it's undeniably my working assumption > that this is true of both LDs and OBEs, but even if that assumption is > wrong in whole or in part I still think they are essentially the same > phenomenon. There are people who think they access other worlds, spirit > guides and so on in lucid dreams so by no means does "dream" equate to > "unreal experience" for everyone. Therefore even from a "woo-woo" > perspective I don't think there would be any great injustice done in > equating the two experiences. Yeh, I think the titles get in the way here a bit. I have always thought of LD as different than OBE. I see how they are essentially the same phenomenom but then why not just call them all "dreams"? I think even if they are all a form of dream there are differences worth noting and wondering about. Are the normal dreams in themselves are fully understood? By "normal" I mean the non-lucid ones. > > > > > > So (speaking of my own visits to these "other realities" similar to my > > > > > real location) how is it that the details of the place can change when > > > > > you look away then back? > > > > > > > > Maybe you're flipping around all the alternate realities? Because you > > are in > > > > an area where you can somehow interact within them all? > > > > > > But why do I have to divert my attention like that? They should be able > > > to switch right before my eyes, no? > > > > True but maybe because you aren't practiced enough to do it that way just > > yet. Just like when we all have different techniques of going OBE. Whatever > > works, ya know? > > > > > > > Why is it that glass doesn't break easily > > > > > there? Why don't the light switches work? Why are the walls so > > flimsy > > > > > you can break them apart? Why are the locks so bad that you can just > > > > > pull a locked door open? Why do I reflect differently in the mirror > > than > > > > > I appear when I look at my clothes etc.? > > > > > > > > Because in this place that all alternate realities are overlapping some > > > > doors are unlocked, some are locked, > > > > > > It's not that they are unlocked, it's that the doorknobs are non- > > > functional; you don't have to turn them. Why should they be non- > > > functional in virtually every "reality" that Ruth and I have tested > > > except waking reality? (She's the one who taught me that trick.) > > > > > > > some switches work, some don't, > > > > > > Hardly a single one does. That's a bit suspicious, wouldn't you say? In > > > my real house they work vastly more often than not. Is it only possible > > > to reach an alternate reality when the power fails there? > > Hey, I handed you one there and you didn't take it. You could have said > that maybe electromagnetic fields interfere with making quantum leaps ... > :) By the way, maybe electromagnetic fields interfere with making quantum leaps ;) > > > > > your > > > > hair is long in some, in some not, etc...? > > > > > > So the mirrors are portals to worlds other than the one my dream/astral > > > body is in? Because I'll be wearing one thing on my dream/astral body > > > and another thing in the mirror image. > > > > > > > Could be ;) > > Then why don't mirrors here act as portals? I think it's a pretty raw > deal that everybody in the other quantum realities gets magic stuff and > we don't. It's not *really* the mirror that's doing it. The mirror is just the tool we are using in our minds to do this. It's always *us* doing it. > > > > > > And why do the people there > > > > > talk and act like idiots? > > > > > > > > Some alternate people are so advanced they just appear to be idiots to > > you? > > > > And then some are just idiots? > > > > > > They would be too stupid to build houses, even houses with no > > > electricity. And no version of me would marry a version of Jay who > > > clacks and gibbers and rolls his eyes like an imp ... no wait ... maybe > > > ... ;) > > > > > > > Well ok, maybe we get interference with memories of our present life so our > > mind tries to create that person there and fails to do so very well. > > It would be difficult to do that in a physical world, no? So maybe we're > not visiting other quantum physical universes in these "not-quite-my- > house" experiences after all, but experiencing a dimension where our > minds create images and influence/distort what we perceive? Well, that's > more reasonable to me. I just think of it as the dream world rather than > the astral plane. But what exactly is the dream world? > > > > > ;) Ya think? I don't know the answers. We can only speculate but it > > was > > > > the best I could come up with right now. lol > > > > > > I may have to send you to the dungeon again. > > > > Nooooooooooo not the dungeon. I already can sense (call it ESP if you like) > > pz's eyes rolling and hear his wicked cackling at me in this thread! > > So you've internalized His Malevolence? Well, since you're carrying your > own portable torturer around in a pocket of your psyche then maybe I > won't send you to the dungeon. > > > > At this point I would start > > > believing the astral realm hypothesis before I would start believing I > > > was visiting alternate physical realms in OBEs. They just aren't > > > physical enough. > > > > OK but here is the last sentence to the article I was reading spoken by > > David Deutsh : > > > > "I'm sure that quantum theory will be proved false one day, because it seems > > inconceivable that we've stumbled across the final theory of physics. But I > > would bet my bottom dollar that the new theory will either retain the > > parallel universe feature of quantum physics, or it will contain something > > even more weird" > > Oh, great. :) > You just can't wait, can you? > My homepage: http://sites.netscape.net/jayavogelsong/ > > The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage: > http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### From: Craig Shillington Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 15:10:16 +1000 Organization: Deja Vous Lines: 73 Message-ID: <3B85E1B8.A09DFEC2@ozemu.com> References: <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com> <3B7C064A.35B4AE66@home.com> <3B7C1420.A0A32903@ozemu.com> <3B7E7555.E6B21A2@ozemu.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp73.horsham.ozemu.com (203.24.252.73) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 998631870 342716 203.24.252.73 (16 [27978]) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,ja Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!Amsterdam.Infonet!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!newshunter!cosy.sbg.ac.at!newsmaster-01.atnet.at!atnet.at!newsrouter.chello.at!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!ppp73.horsham.ozemu.COM!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70677 Janice wrote: > > In article <3B7E7555.E6B21A2@ozemu.com>, scrappy1@ozemu.com says... > > > > > > Janice wrote: > > > > > > In article <3B7C1420.A0A32903@ozemu.com>, scrappy1@ozemu.com says... > > > > > > > > I'm not suggesting though, that these experiences may not also be > > > > some function of the brain or that they are real and we do actually > > > > get out in some other counterpart of physical reality in which > > > > things are different. For what I've experienced and understand of my > > > > own experiences, my opinion points more readily towards some of the > > > > examples I've pointed out. Until we know for sure ... I'll keep > > > > speculating the way I do, always open to any suggestions and willing > > > > to keep an open mind that even if my mind is playing tricks; at > > > > least I can play along with the tricks and learn wonderful things > > > > about myself. Until then, I have experienced too many things > > > > personally to prove to me that I interact outside the realm that is > > > > *me* and gather information outside of my personal being. That shows > > > > me there is more to this than just games inside my head. :) > > > > > > Have you done particularly better at what seems to be gathering > > > verifiable information by extra-physical means in OBEs than you have in > > > regular dreams, or in waking life? > > > > I'm not sure what you are asking here? I was just stating that I > > *HAVE* gathered verifiable info whilst OOB ... which shows *me* that > > it is possible. The way I gathered the information during the OBE > > was in no way different than what I would have done if I was > > physical ... I walked around and looked at things and made notes of > > particular things and recorded them for verification upon returning > > to the physical. (With the exception of interpreting an emotional > > state during the OBE ... ) I wouldn't say I had done better or worse > > .... the opportunity was presented to me so I took it. > > What I'm getting at is that people have reported gathering information by > extra-physical means in OBEs, in lucid dreams, in regular dreams, in > hypnagogia, in meditative reveries, and even while awake, so when I > consider paranormal rather than mundane explanations for such things it's > easier for me to imagine that there might possibly be a "psi" faculty > that can manifest under a variety of conditions rather than that OBEs are > intrinsically paranormal events. I'm wondering if you personally seem to > be better at this sort of thing in OBEs than in other states. Simply put .... no. I am no better or worse at gathering information OOB than I am here in the physical. I think I just have more/different *tools* while OOB ... and while astral I know their function. It's when I return to the physical that the tools I used to get the info become *unknown* and I have to resort to the tools I have here to express the information I gathered. It's like if I was OOB trying to explain to an entity who had always existed in that state (non-physical) how to read using his eyes. He's never had eyes and so has never read using eyes. I'd have to explain it to him in ways he'd understand .... using the tools he has. Thus .... misrepresentation and misinterpretation. Craig -- The sure way to make a thing impossible- -is to think it so. --- Franklin -- alt.out-of-body Sign in List http://out-of-body.tripod.com/signin.html Janice's alt.out-of-body Homepage http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### From: Craig Shillington Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 15:21:44 +1000 Organization: Deja Vous Lines: 101 Message-ID: <3B85E468.96C261C3@ozemu.com> References: <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com> <3B7E7702.7D724961@ozemu.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp73.horsham.ozemu.com (203.24.252.73) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 998631873 342716 203.24.252.73 (16 [27978]) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en,ja 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!uni-berlin.de!ppp73.horsham.ozemu.COM!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70673 hi Janice > In article <3B7E7702.7D724961@ozemu.com>, scrappy1@ozemu.com says... > > > > > > Janice wrote: > > > > > > In article <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com>, scrappy1@ozemu.com says... > > > > > > > > > In article <9bxe7.1068$0M1.15950@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com>, > > > > > > lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > > > > > > > Now getting even more woo-woo..... perhaps if my mind can travel it goes > > > > > quantum time traveling which could explain the differences in bed position > > > > > or windows etc. > > > > > The "other place" could be a duplicate place but things > > > > > rearranged a bit. Our other selves may have the bed by the window rather > > > > > than the door. > > > > > > > > You may also be sensing wrongly, not interpreting the information > > > > you have perceived correctly back here in the physical. You may also > > > > wish to move your bed to another position in the physical so this > > > > shows up in the astral counterpart. > > > > > > On the assumption that "astral counterpart" is approximately congruent to > > > "dream world" > > > > My astral counterpart .... may be your dream world. I believe they > > may be made of the same material. > > As Gunnar would say, astrons! :) Or Odic Fluid ... or consciousness or thought or energy ..... just what is an aura? > > > then certainly wishes and other psychological influences > > > could plausibly affect the way the room looks. > > > > Oh, for sure. :) The question is .... how do we tell what we are > > making up from what we have nothing to do with? Maybe we can't ... > > maybe we don't need to ... maybe we already know the answer to that > > while we are there. > > We probably couldn't tell. Some have suggested that if you can control > an image then it's self-generated, but suppose you only control your > perception of the image? I've actually gotten into debates about this > kind of thing with dream characters, LOL. Interesting concept. More along the lines of how I think though. What if we don't actually generate the image at all? Suppose the things we perceive while OOB are the result of overlapping thoughts, energies or ideas ... concentrated enough to form the *image* we perceive? > > > Another example would be > > > memories, recent and long-term, blending together. I still get false > > > awakenings that place me in my previous house, for instance. > > > > I agree with what you are saying ... although all my FA's take place > > from where ever I lay sleeping. > > Most of my false awakenings take place where they "should" but a sizeable > number don't. My OBEs normally take place where I'm sleeping, but there > was one time when I deliberately made the environment into my habitual > one rather than the apartment where I was sleeping, by imagining that I > was home and going through the actions of jumping out my bedroom window > and moving through the driveway at home, so when the visuals came in > clearly I was indeed in my regular OBE neighborhood. I've had some funny > twists to OBEs as well, such as jumping out my bedroom window and ending > up on the model train platform in the basement. :) Now there's a novel idea for an OBE ..... these Star Wars models I'm building might have other uses now! ;) > > When you dream about dreaming ... do > > you always wake up in the dream where you started dreaming from > > Janice? > > Offhand I can't remember any dreams within dreams other than "OBEs" that > I induce from false awakenings that I incorrectly assume are real > awakenings--usually thinking, "Wow, that was easy!" and not questioning > the absence of vibes and effort, LOL. What about in these ... when you *wake* from these, are you where you were before you woke *into* them? Craig -- The sure way to make a thing impossible- -is to think it so. --- Franklin -- alt.out-of-body Sign in List http://out-of-body.tripod.com/signin.html Janice's alt.out-of-body Homepage http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### From: "The Original Ken" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body References: Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Lines: 86 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 09:20:06 -0600 NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.241.33.19 X-Trace: wormhole.dimensional.com 998752717 216.241.33.19 (Sat, 25 Aug 2001 09:18:37 MDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 09:18:37 MDT Organization: Interlink Advertising 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!news-lei1.dfn.de!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!colt.net!nycmny1-snf1.gtei.net!nycmny1-snh1.gtei.net!chcgil2-snh1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!newsfeeds.sol.net!newspump.sol.net!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!pulsar.dimensional.com!dimensional.com!wormhole.dimensional.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70776 Janice wrote in message news:MPG.15e4bf90891120c8989a45@news.starlinx.com... > In article , > lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > Science doesn't have a definitive answer as to why we dream. Read the > chapter on The Functions of Sleep and Dreaming for a summary of the > various theories. It's a shame that science does not reflect on the dualist approach as a premise when coming up with theories. The assumption that dualism is not a valid premise is really just dogma and it leads to dead ends such as this one. (IMO) But I really just wanted to comment on the statement below. > > > You would hardly need a body to travel with your mind. I think it's > > > created out of familiarity--habit and a mental map of your body. It can > > > be dispensed with altogether in OBEs/LDs. > > > > True but in the same reasoning if we are not used to traveling with our > > minds why wouldn't we "form" a physical body to feel more comfortable about > > it? > > Form a *physical* body? How? I don't know anyone who manifest physical > matter around them. If you mean do you form the shape of a physical body > in OBEs because you're used to having a body, then yeah, that's basically > what I said--it forms out of habit. It's just not a *necessity* since > some people don't utilize a body shape in OBEs. Some experience > themselves as balls of light or points of consciousness, though > experiencing oneself with a dream/astral body seems to be a lot more > common. For all practical purposes, whatever form your "body" takes in an OBE may very well be a necessity. We have our physical body while awake because it is a necessity while functioning in this reality. Likewise one could argue that on some alternate planes, a physical body is necessary in order to function there, and on other alternate planes, a ball of light is the necessary form while functioning on that plane of existance. Since I have yet to find a real distinction as far as "physicalness" between our waking reality and an OBE reality, I have to make the assumption that whatever form we take is physical and necessary for that particular environment. BTW, I usually take on an ordinary form although I have seen myself with glowing almost transparent hands one time. Never seen my reflection. > > > And why do the people there > > > talk and act like idiots? > > > > Some alternate people are so advanced they just appear to be idiots to you? > > And then some are just idiots? > > They would be too stupid to build houses, even houses with no > electricity. And no version of me would marry a version of Jay who > clacks and gibbers and rolls his eyes like an imp ... no wait ... maybe > ... ;) I have met quite a few intellectual people. I have talked with people that actually think before they respond (which is always fun to watch) as if they are being very careful about what they say. I have also met people that talk freely and with a great deal of charm and intelligence. Have all your OBEs been void of this? > > I may have to send you to the dungeon again. At this point I would start > believing the astral realm hypothesis before I would start believing I > was visiting alternate physical realms in OBEs. They just aren't > physical enough. I hadn't thought of making the distinction between alternate physical realms and astral realms. What would you say "is" the distinction? Ken > > -- > > It's always darkest just before it goes pitch black.--Despair, Inc. > > My homepage: http://sites.netscape.net/jayavogelsong/ > > The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage: > http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html ###### From: "The Original Ken" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body References: Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Lines: 21 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Message-ID: <6zPh7.274$mr3.9851@wormhole.dimensional.com> Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 09:35:20 -0600 NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.241.33.19 X-Trace: wormhole.dimensional.com 998753602 216.241.33.19 (Sat, 25 Aug 2001 09:33:22 MDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 09:33:22 MDT Organization: Interlink Advertising Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!Amsterdam.Infonet!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!skynet.be!news.stealth.net!news-out.visi.com!hermes.visi.com!wormhole.dimensional.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70773 Janice wrote in message > > > > Your mind goes into a pretty low ebb in certain phases of sleep, as far > as can be judged from collecting mentation reports from people just woken > up from deep sleep etc., and it's usually not all that bright even during > dreaming, since it can't even properly register blatant absurdities, > false memories and so on. I can't remember how many times I have put the Frozen Yogert in the refridgerator and the cheese in the freezer. Every time I have done this however was during a time when I was thinking about something else beside the task at hand. Now these were blatant absurdities yet occurred during waking reality. In addition, my lucidity about the task at hand was obviously zero. So if these things can happen while awake, why not during an OBE? Ken ###### From: "The Original Ken" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body References: Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Lines: 48 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 09:45:04 -0600 NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.241.33.19 X-Trace: wormhole.dimensional.com 998754186 216.241.33.19 (Sat, 25 Aug 2001 09:43:06 MDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 09:43:06 MDT Organization: Interlink Advertising 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-was.dfn.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!paloalto-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!pulsar.dimensional.com!dimensional.com!wormhole.dimensional.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70775 lorz wrote in message news:G4tg7.9676$V7.238209@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com... > > "Janice" wrote in message > news:MPG.15e60f12bf9f5727989a55@news.starlinx.com... > > > > OK, I *think* I see where you're headed. When you question whether an > > OBE should be considered a type of LD what really concerns you is whether > > calling it an LD would mean that the OBE must then be considered > > subjective and self-created? Well, it's undeniably my working assumption > > that this is true of both LDs and OBEs, but even if that assumption is > > wrong in whole or in part I still think they are essentially the same > > phenomenon. There are people who think they access other worlds, spirit > > guides and so on in lucid dreams so by no means does "dream" equate to > > "unreal experience" for everyone. Therefore even from a "woo-woo" > > perspective I don't think there would be any great injustice done in > > equating the two experiences. > > Yeh, I think the titles get in the way here a bit. I have always thought of > LD as different than OBE. I see how they are essentially the same phenomenom > but then why not just call them all "dreams"? I think even if they are all a > form of dream there are differences worth noting and wondering about. Are > the normal dreams in themselves are fully understood? By "normal" I mean the > non-lucid ones. I think of the difference between an OBE and an LD as being the difference between waking reality and sitting on a lounge chair in the sun, partially dozing off and having a hypnogogic experience which is so captivating that you forget you are lying in the sun at all. The hypnogogic experience in this case would be the LD and the lying on the beach would be the OBE. However, I should add that like you and Janice, the differences I experience are more subtle than that. A long time ago a bunch of us came up with a list of the differences between LDs and OBEs. I wish I had that list around right now as it would really add to this conversation. Ken ###### From: Janice Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Message-ID: References: <6zPh7.274$mr3.9851@wormhole.dimensional.com> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 48 NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 15:39:24 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv3-c8y8enZixJAEwLccWPgVaKznx6vJyJ9uhpfJpdt2Byvzs+0xcXDRSzU6gpwJ/GtDrKFEDY44GYGjwgn!alPUPYVcBGlj9dWVJVmUkRu2DKZsOjl4NlhT7p8I/T2VVvQyWr8IlqDqDHtip5niTeTLI5xGRQMy!mvF5sViASg== X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html 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: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 16:43:20 -0400 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!Amsterdam.Infonet!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!skynet.be!portc03.blue.aol.com!newsfeed.skycache.com.MISMATCH!newsfeed1.cidera.com!Cidera!cyclone-sjo1.usenetserver.com!usenetserver.com!border1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news6.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70771 In article <6zPh7.274$mr3.9851@wormhole.dimensional.com>, sculpt@privatei.com says... > > Janice wrote in message > > > > > > Your mind goes into a pretty low ebb in certain phases of sleep, as far > > as can be judged from collecting mentation reports from people just woken > > up from deep sleep etc., and it's usually not all that bright even during > > dreaming, since it can't even properly register blatant absurdities, > > false memories and so on. > > I can't remember how many times I have put the Frozen Yogert in the > refridgerator and the cheese in the freezer. Every time I have done this > however was during a time when I was thinking about something else beside > the task at hand. Now these were blatant absurdities yet occurred during > waking reality. In addition, my lucidity about the task at hand was > obviously zero. So if these things can happen while awake, why not during > an OBE? I didn't say that mental lapses could not occur during OBEs. The quote above was a quick description of typical sleeping mentation, in response to Lorz's idea that the mind never seems to sleep. It was not saying that because mental lapses can occur during OBEs then OBEs must be ordinary dreams, as your question seems to imply. The mind is, as I said, *usually* not all that bright while dreaming, so contrary to Lorz's assertion one could say it sleeps in the sense of some important cognitive functions going into a low ebb for an extended period. Obviously there are cases where these functions are not so badly disabled, i.e. lucid dreams/OBEs, though even during those we can still sometimes gloss over discrepancies with reality and false memories. In waking life if we make an absent-minded error we'll often catch it quickly because our lucidity typically doesn't dip for very long, and because reality is stable enough to give us consistent feedback. In a nonlucid dream, we don't have either luxury, and in a lucid dream, we can't completely rely on them. -- While good fortune often eludes you, bad fortune never misses.--Despair, Inc. My homepage: http://sites.netscape.net/jayavogelsong/ The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html The alt.dreams.lucid newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/home.html ###### From: Janice Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Message-ID: References: <3B7B6769.FF8EC0A6@ozemu.com> <3B7E7702.7D724961@ozemu.com> <3B85E468.96C261C3@ozemu.com> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 75 NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 17:41:11 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv3-gkPBVe5O88HmihAtgo4SwBv5qJ3rUJt6a9l06e7LV6cxEqPTJMLu0vr/AjsFuDRGI3cOh/GhxWnGBeE!+oqMR9B0rEFMI+BRA/32vFbJCJMx/s38dYNKWFlbCbgrTO+rK/LukeAtobsED2TribsN+7LOpExT!k/zmtGha9A== X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html 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: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 18:45:06 -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-stu1.dfn.de!news-mue1.dfn.de!news-was.dfn.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!nf3.bellglobal.com!border1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news6.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70759 In article <3B85E468.96C261C3@ozemu.com>, scrappy1@ozemu.com says... > > Janice wrote: > > Craig wrote: > > > Oh, for sure. :) The question is .... how do we tell what we are > > > making up from what we have nothing to do with? Maybe we can't ... > > > maybe we don't need to ... maybe we already know the answer to that > > > while we are there. > > > > We probably couldn't tell. Some have suggested that if you can control > > an image then it's self-generated, but suppose you only control your > > perception of the image? I've actually gotten into debates about this > > kind of thing with dream characters, LOL. > > Interesting concept. More along the lines of how I think though. > What if we don't actually generate the image at all? Suppose the > things we perceive while OOB are the result of overlapping thoughts, > energies or ideas ... concentrated enough to form the *image* we > perceive? Some people say as much of waking reality. > > Most of my false awakenings take place where they "should" but a sizeable > > number don't. My OBEs normally take place where I'm sleeping, but there > > was one time when I deliberately made the environment into my habitual > > one rather than the apartment where I was sleeping, by imagining that I > > was home and going through the actions of jumping out my bedroom window > > and moving through the driveway at home, so when the visuals came in > > clearly I was indeed in my regular OBE neighborhood. I've had some funny > > twists to OBEs as well, such as jumping out my bedroom window and ending > > up on the model train platform in the basement. :) > > Now there's a novel idea for an OBE ..... these Star Wars models I'm > building might have other uses now! ;) Well, I was just *on* the platform; it's not like I entered it scaled- down like in Beetlejuice. Fun idea, though. > > > When you dream about dreaming ... do > > > you always wake up in the dream where you started dreaming from > > > Janice? > > > > Offhand I can't remember any dreams within dreams other than "OBEs" that > > I induce from false awakenings that I incorrectly assume are real > > awakenings--usually thinking, "Wow, that was easy!" and not questioning > > the absence of vibes and effort, LOL. > > What about in these ... when you *wake* from these, are you where > you were before you woke *into* them? You mean do I revert back to the setting of the false awakening from which I initiated the OBE if I have a another false awakening that brings me out of the OBE? Yes, though it might just be very similar and not identical. Oh, and I did remember a recent dream within a dream. I knew I was dreaming but was really bored with the dream in question so I tried to wake myself up. Instead I found myself in a dream setting similar to an earlier one from the same dream sequence (I'm not sure how much earlier). It was at least more interesting, so I did decide to continue with it. -- While good fortune often eludes you, bad fortune never misses.--Despair, Inc. My homepage: http://sites.netscape.net/jayavogelsong/ The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html The alt.dreams.lucid newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/home.html ###### From: Janice Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Message-ID: References: X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 79 NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 19:36:52 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv3-4mdtrHd8Q0djtQqIKUqLWlVnWyXY3IeJWMaVMPQ9Nw6SYPZGwQ+/2SpYJxf7LiMuhpV7ODIEhun/m2g!yiTww2yyhVe0sYbkXk4rzaop1IiU1OrIbfCA+0ofAP5Z8x08vRtpZ2jmJssMt+DXzXKTfTNORgDT!jM+a96I2xQ== X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html 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: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 20:40:48 -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-stu1.dfn.de!news-mue1.dfn.de!news-was.dfn.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.onemain.com!feed1.onemain.com!novia!novia!nntp2.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news6.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70765 In article , lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > "Janice" wrote in message > news:MPG.15e60f12bf9f5727989a55@news.starlinx.com... > > > > OK, I *think* I see where you're headed. When you question whether an > > OBE should be considered a type of LD what really concerns you is whether > > calling it an LD would mean that the OBE must then be considered > > subjective and self-created? Well, it's undeniably my working assumption > > that this is true of both LDs and OBEs, but even if that assumption is > > wrong in whole or in part I still think they are essentially the same > > phenomenon. There are people who think they access other worlds, spirit > > guides and so on in lucid dreams so by no means does "dream" equate to > > "unreal experience" for everyone. Therefore even from a "woo-woo" > > perspective I don't think there would be any great injustice done in > > equating the two experiences. > > Yeh, I think the titles get in the way here a bit. I have always thought of > LD as different than OBE. I see how they are essentially the same phenomenom > but then why not just call them all "dreams"? I do. For me a lucid dream is a type of dream and an OBE is a subtype of lucid dream. > I think even if they are all a > form of dream there are differences worth noting and wondering about. Of course! They are interesting variations on dreaming experience. > Are > the normal dreams in themselves are fully understood? By "normal" I mean the > non-lucid ones. Nope. There's still plenty of disagreement on that score. > > Hey, I handed you one there and you didn't take it. You could have said > > that maybe electromagnetic fields interfere with making quantum leaps ... > > :) > > By the way, maybe electromagnetic fields interfere with making quantum leaps > ;) I thought as much. > > Then why don't mirrors here act as portals? I think it's a pretty raw > > deal that everybody in the other quantum realities gets magic stuff and > > we don't. > > It's not *really* the mirror that's doing it. The mirror is just the tool we > are using in our minds to do this. It's always *us* doing it. So why can't we do reflection tricks with mirrors here then? > > So maybe we're > > not visiting other quantum physical universes in these "not-quite-my- > > house" experiences after all, but experiencing a dimension where our > > minds create images and influence/distort what we perceive? Well, that's > > more reasonable to me. I just think of it as the dream world rather than > > the astral plane. > > But what exactly is the dream world? In my opinion it's probably a mostly memory-based model of reality that takes the place of the mostly sensory-based model of reality that we employ while we're awake. -- While good fortune often eludes you, bad fortune never misses.--Despair, Inc. My homepage: http://sites.netscape.net/jayavogelsong/ The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html The alt.dreams.lucid newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/home.html ###### From: Janice Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Message-ID: References: X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 123 NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 20:10:52 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv3-uWNLWo89h4wBlBIwG2zTylYE+d0oMqo3FVzwMycDK/bvTwSjk3Uo4jGc0e/9O8xKdMN9kfaXO8fliS4!EIabFtr+EtQHcM5D2J92pKwXHqD5EWeXUIGjYawmfUn491ixbhVJqLuabJd7h2aGP+H4dF3heESQ!ZYjlwuQhHw== X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html 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: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 21:14:46 -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-stu1.dfn.de!news-koe1.dfn.de!news-was.dfn.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!howland.erols.net!portc.blue.aol.com.MISMATCH!portc01.blue.aol.com!nntp2.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news6.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70769 In article , sculpt@privatei.com says... > > Janice wrote in message > news:MPG.15e4bf90891120c8989a45@news.starlinx.com... > > In article , > > lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > > > Science doesn't have a definitive answer as to why we dream. Read the > > chapter on The Functions of Sleep and Dreaming for a summary of the > > various theories. > > It's a shame that science does not reflect on the dualist approach as a > premise when coming up with theories. The assumption that dualism is not a > valid premise is really just dogma and it leads to dead ends such as this > one. (IMO) But I really just wanted to comment on the statement below. Then you'll be glad to know that the theory of dreaming presented in our book makes no statements about the origin of consciousness. Although he doesn't take OBEs literally Jay is himself a dualist so he took pains to assure that what we wrote works from a dualist point of view as well as a materialist one. > > > > You would hardly need a body to travel with your mind. I think it's > > > > created out of familiarity--habit and a mental map of your body. It > can > > > > be dispensed with altogether in OBEs/LDs. > > > > > > True but in the same reasoning if we are not used to traveling with our > > > minds why wouldn't we "form" a physical body to feel more comfortable > about > > > it? > > > > Form a *physical* body? How? I don't know anyone who manifest physical > > matter around them. If you mean do you form the shape of a physical body > > in OBEs because you're used to having a body, then yeah, that's basically > > what I said--it forms out of habit. It's just not a *necessity* since > > some people don't utilize a body shape in OBEs. Some experience > > themselves as balls of light or points of consciousness, though > > experiencing oneself with a dream/astral body seems to be a lot more > > common. > > For all practical purposes, whatever form your "body" takes in an OBE may > very well be a necessity. We have our physical body while awake because it > is a necessity while functioning in this reality. Likewise one could argue > that on some alternate planes, a physical body is necessary in order to > function there, and on other alternate planes, a ball of light is the > necessary form while functioning on that plane of existance. You could, but what about the cases where there is no form at all, just a point of consciousness viewing the scene? > Since I have > yet to find a real distinction as far as "physicalness" between our waking > reality and an OBE reality, I have to make the assumption that whatever form > we take is physical and necessary for that particular environment. Hm ... I thought the usual "woo-woo" explanation for why we can float, fly and go through walls in OBEs, sometimes to the awe of the "locals," was that we are not physical while OOB? You think instead that the rules of physics are simply different on the different planes? > BTW, I > usually take on an ordinary form although I have seen myself with glowing > almost transparent hands one time. Never seen my reflection. Never looked for it, or looked in a mirror but saw nothing? I usually look pretty normal in OBEs and regular LDs but can have oddities with my hands as well. > I have met quite a few intellectual people. I have talked with people that > actually think before they respond (which is always fun to watch) as if they > are being very careful about what they say. I've often seen lucid dream people hesitate a lot before saying things but if they are thinking in the interim it doesn't often avail them much, judging by what they say. :) One time when I asked an LD neurologist about this pause effect he was exhibiting he said he had to "pull ideas out of my head." > I have also met people that > talk freely and with a great deal of charm and intelligence. Have all your > OBEs been void of this? Not all, but most. I've had some conversations with disembodied voices in SP that sounded quite intelligent and realistic, even if what they said was very weird (my infamous computer geeks who claim to hack into our dreaming minds). And my serial characters were often charming. But most OBE people I've met have been very vacuous, thouh not quite as empty as those Trish meets. I reported one typical incident here earlier this year, in which I went to the OBE version of the local bakery and couldn't make the women there understand what a corn muffin was for the life of me. > > At this point I would start > > believing the astral realm hypothesis before I would start believing I > > was visiting alternate physical realms in OBEs. They just aren't > > physical enough. > > I hadn't thought of making the distinction between alternate physical realms > and astral realms. What would you say "is" the distinction? I was under the impression that the astral realm hypothesis considers OBEs to take place in a dimension where our own thoughts, emotions, wishes etc. mingle with the projected extensions of actual objects from this world to create what we see, whereas the alternate physical realm hypothesis of OBEs posits that we can slip into different parallel universes that are every bit as physical as this one and aren't impacted by our own minds. -- While good fortune often eludes you, bad fortune never misses.--Despair, Inc. My homepage: http://sites.netscape.net/jayavogelsong/ The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html The alt.dreams.lucid newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/home.html ###### From: ian_spedding@lineone.net (Ian H Spedding) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: 26 Aug 2001 00:29:26 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 130 Message-ID: <593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.1.116.203 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 998810966 32278 127.0.0.1 (26 Aug 2001 07:29:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 26 Aug 2001 07:29:26 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!news-was.dfn.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70753 Janice wrote in message news:... > In article , > sculpt@privatei.com says... > > > > Janice wrote in message > > news:MPG.15e4bf90891120c8989a45@news.starlinx.com... > > > In article , > > > lorz@bellsouth.net says... > > > > > > Science doesn't have a definitive answer as to why we dream. Read the > > > chapter on The Functions of Sleep and Dreaming for a summary of the > > > various theories. > > > > It's a shame that science does not reflect on the dualist approach as a > > premise when coming up with theories. The assumption that dualism is not a > > valid premise is really just dogma and it leads to dead ends such as this > > one. (IMO) But I really just wanted to comment on the statement below. > > Then you'll be glad to know that the theory of dreaming presented in our > book makes no statements about the origin of consciousness. Although he > doesn't take OBEs literally Jay is himself a dualist so he took pains to > assure that what we wrote works from a dualist point of view as well as a > materialist one. Exactly, that is one of the reasons I found your book to be such a thought-provoking discussion of the topic. > > > > > You would hardly need a body to travel with your mind. I think it's > > > > > created out of familiarity--habit and a mental map of your body. It > can > > > > > be dispensed with altogether in OBEs/LDs. > > > > > > > > True but in the same reasoning if we are not used to traveling with our > > > > minds why wouldn't we "form" a physical body to feel more comfortable > about > > > > it? > > > > > > Form a *physical* body? How? I don't know anyone who manifest physical > > > matter around them. If you mean do you form the shape of a physical body > > > in OBEs because you're used to having a body, then yeah, that's basically > > > what I said--it forms out of habit. It's just not a *necessity* since > > > some people don't utilize a body shape in OBEs. Some experience > > > themselves as balls of light or points of consciousness, though > > > experiencing oneself with a dream/astral body seems to be a lot more > > > common. > > > > For all practical purposes, whatever form your "body" takes in an OBE may > > very well be a necessity. We have our physical body while awake because it > > is a necessity while functioning in this reality. Likewise one could argue > > that on some alternate planes, a physical body is necessary in order to > > function there, and on other alternate planes, a ball of light is the > > necessary form while functioning on that plane of existance. > > You could, but what about the cases where there is no form at all, just a > point of consciousness viewing the scene? > > > Since I have > > yet to find a real distinction as far as "physicalness" between our waking > > reality and an OBE reality, I have to make the assumption that whatever form > > we take is physical and necessary for that particular environment. > > Hm ... I thought the usual "woo-woo" explanation for why we can float, > fly and go through walls in OBEs, sometimes to the awe of the "locals," > was that we are not physical while OOB? You think instead that the rules > of physics are simply different on the different planes? > > > BTW, I > > usually take on an ordinary form although I have seen myself with glowing > > almost transparent hands one time. Never seen my reflection. > > Never looked for it, or looked in a mirror but saw nothing? > > I usually look pretty normal in OBEs and regular LDs but can have > oddities with my hands as well. > > > I have met quite a few intellectual people. I have talked with people that > > actually think before they respond (which is always fun to watch) as if they > > are being very careful about what they say. > > I've often seen lucid dream people hesitate a lot before saying things > but if they are thinking in the interim it doesn't often avail them much, > judging by what they say. :) One time when I asked an LD neurologist > about this pause effect he was exhibiting he said he had to "pull ideas > out of my head." > > > I have also met people that > > talk freely and with a great deal of charm and intelligence. Have all your > > OBEs been void of this? > > Not all, but most. I've had some conversations with disembodied voices > in SP that sounded quite intelligent and realistic, even if what they > said was very weird (my infamous computer geeks who claim to hack into > our dreaming minds). And my serial characters were often charming. But > most OBE people I've met have been very vacuous, thouh not quite as empty > as those Trish meets. I reported one typical incident here earlier this > year, in which I went to the OBE version of the local bakery and couldn't > make the women there understand what a corn muffin was for the life of > me. > > > > At this point I would start > > > believing the astral realm hypothesis before I would start believing I > > > was visiting alternate physical realms in OBEs. They just aren't > > > physical enough. > > > > I hadn't thought of making the distinction between alternate physical realms > > and astral realms. What would you say "is" the distinction? > > I was under the impression that the astral realm hypothesis considers > OBEs to take place in a dimension where our own thoughts, emotions, > wishes etc. mingle with the projected extensions of actual objects from > this world to create what we see, whereas the alternate physical realm > hypothesis of OBEs posits that we can slip into different parallel > universes that are every bit as physical as this one and aren't impacted > by our own minds. Another small point that is sometimes overlooked is that if these astral planes or alternate dimensions actually exist, and if we are able to visit them, albeit in an altered state of consciousness, then information is passing between them and this reality. This, by definition, makes them a part of this universe and accessible, therefore, to scientific investigation. It also means that the two dimensions or planes must influence each other in ways that should be observable and measurable. Only of the two dimensions were completely isolated from each other would this not be true, but in that case we would not be able to visit them and we would know nothing about them. Ian Ian H Spedding ============== ###### From: "William Bliss" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body References: <593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com> Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Lines: 48 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 Message-ID: X-Trace: NDggTm9BdXRoVXNlciBURUxPQ0lUWS1SRUFERVJTIDY0LjM0LjIzOC4yMjUgIFN1biwgMjYgQXVn!IDIwMDEgMDk6Mzk6MzQgUERU X-Abuse-Info: Please forward ALL headers when reporting abuse. X-Complaints-To: abuse@bb.directv.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 09:39:34 PDT Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 12:34:06 -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-stu1.dfn.de!news-mue1.dfn.de!news-was.dfn.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp-relay.ihug.net!ihug.co.nz!telocity-west!TELOCITY!newsrump.sjc.telocity.net!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70779 "Ian H Spedding" wrote in message news:593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com... [...] > Another small point that is sometimes overlooked is that if these > astral planes or alternate dimensions actually exist, and if we are > able to visit them, albeit in an altered state of consciousness, then > information is passing between them and this reality. This, by > definition, makes them a part of this universe and accessible, > therefore, to scientific investigation. This is true for statistical subjective investigations, certainly, but objective investigations will require error estimations (reproducability) before they fall into the domain of science. The existence of any reproducable psychic-measurments, I feel, is at the core of the skeptic vs woo-woo debate. > It also means that the two > dimensions or planes must influence each other in ways that should be > observable and measurable. Only of the two dimensions were completely > isolated from each other would this not be true, but in that case we > would not be able to visit them and we would know nothing about them. I agree with your assertion, but many subtle assumptions are hidden behind it. When projectors "shift their dimension" and find themselves in the same astral world (w/o needing to travel) we are drawn to the conclusion that these other dimensions must be moving with Earth, and maybe they are. But this doesn't require that these astral structures add to Earths gravitational well, or produce other easily observable interaction phenomena. OTOH, QED and QCD (physics) theories don't provide a clue as to why a particular nucleus will decay at a particular time. Maybe this decay is actually caused by the collision with unknown, possibly even extra-dimensional, particles. Various woo-woo groups have put considerable effort into thinking about the many various (seemingly contradictory) quandaries such as you've proposed here. My main point being, that having an interest in the analysis of theories, whose purpose is explaining a wide array of anecdotal phenomena, does not (necessarily) indicate a person is stupid, naive or unscientific. Having an interest in woo-woo gedanken experiments could simply mean that a person likes difficult & risky intellectual challenges. Wm ###### From: spamnot@nothanks.com (Aphasic Orator) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Message-ID: <3b892785.612847@news1.on.sympatico.ca> References: <593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.21/32.243 Lines: 59 Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 17:38:31 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.92.91.172 X-Complaints-To: abuse@sympatico.ca X-Trace: news20.bellglobal.com 998847514 65.92.91.172 (Sun, 26 Aug 2001 13:38:34 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 13:38:34 EDT Organization: Bell Sympatico Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!Amsterdam.Infonet!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!newshunter!cosy.sbg.ac.at!newsfeed.Austria.EU.net!newsfeed.kpnqwest.at!newscore.univie.ac.at!newsfeed.online.be!newsfeed.sovam.com!nf1.bellglobal.com!nf2.bellglobal.com!news20.bellglobal.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70740 On 26 Aug 2001 00:29:26 -0700, ian_spedding@lineone.net (Ian H Spedding) wrote: >Another small point that is sometimes overlooked is that if these >astral planes or alternate dimensions actually exist, and if we are >able to visit them, albeit in an altered state of consciousness, then >information is passing between them and this reality. This, by >definition, makes them a part of this universe and accessible, >therefore, to scientific investigation. It also means that the two >dimensions or planes must influence each other in ways that should be >observable and measurable. Only of the two dimensions were completely >isolated from each other would this not be true, but in that case we >would not be able to visit them and we would know nothing about them. Hi Ian, At first glance it may appear to be as simple and straight forward as that, but when you consider that scientific proof requires repeatability under controlled conditions, it throws a monkey wrench into the works. If you review many of the accounts that people relate about these types of experiences, consistent control over these experiences seems to be the exception rather than the rule. While their are some gifted people who seem to have a great deal more control over these experiences than most, they still don't seem to be able to turn these experiences on and off at will and control them enough to satisfy the repeatablity and controlled condition requirements that would meet scientific standards that are applied to experiments in physical reality. Even if people start off with a clear purpose before trying to initiate an experience, they may find they just don't have enough control over the experience to achieve their goal on a consistent basis, or when they make the shift to an altered state of consciousness their point of view changes or events occur that cause them to forget their original purpose. Studies on these types of tests show results in terms of hits and statistical probabilty over chance (if that's the right terminology) rather than clear cut "success or failure" results. Experiemnts would have to designed that allow for the uncontrollable and unrepeatable aspects of these types of experiences, yet still be able to achieve significant statistical results to satisfy hard nosed scientists. A tall order! If the best you can come up with is a statistical probablity that is only a little better than chance after several years of experiemts, you'll probably find you still haven't convinced anyone of much. Hard nosed skeptics will likely say things like "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" (or something along those lines) and you won't be much further along than when you first started. This is the reality for many of the "psi" experiemnts that have occured to date. Perhaps some sort of major paradigm shift in scientific views will be required first before these types of experiments begin to be taken seriously by the scientific community at large. Although we may be getting close to such a paradigm shift already, with all the new theories and ideas that are being thrown around in quantum mechanics and the like these days. /ao ###### From: ian_spedding@lineone.net (Ian H Spedding) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: 27 Aug 2001 02:21:31 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 88 Message-ID: <593da164.0108270121.5f161e82@posting.google.com> References: <593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com> <3b892785.612847@news1.on.sympatico.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.6.80.140 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 998904092 19384 127.0.0.1 (27 Aug 2001 09:21:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 Aug 2001 09:21:32 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-mue1.dfn.de!news-was.dfn.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70816 spamnot@nothanks.com (Aphasic Orator) wrote in message news:<3b892785.612847@news1.on.sympatico.ca>... > On 26 Aug 2001 00:29:26 -0700, ian_spedding@lineone.net (Ian H > Spedding) wrote: > > >Another small point that is sometimes overlooked is that if these > >astral planes or alternate dimensions actually exist, and if we are > >able to visit them, albeit in an altered state of consciousness, then > >information is passing between them and this reality. This, by > >definition, makes them a part of this universe and accessible, > >therefore, to scientific investigation. It also means that the two > >dimensions or planes must influence each other in ways that should be > >observable and measurable. Only of the two dimensions were completely > >isolated from each other would this not be true, but in that case we > >would not be able to visit them and we would know nothing about them. > > Hi Ian, > At first glance it may appear to be as simple and straight forward > as that, but when you consider that scientific proof requires > repeatability under controlled conditions, it throws a monkey wrench > into the works. If you review many of the accounts that people > relate about these types of experiences, consistent control over > these experiences seems to be the exception rather than the rule. > While their are some gifted people who seem to have a great deal > more control over these experiences than most, they still don't seem > to be able to turn these experiences on and off at will and control > them enough to satisfy the repeatablity and controlled condition > requirements that would meet scientific standards that are applied to > experiments in physical reality. > > Even if people start off with a clear purpose before trying to > initiate an experience, they may find they just don't have enough > control over the experience to achieve their goal on a consistent > basis, or when they make the shift to an altered state of > consciousness their point of view changes or events occur that cause > them to forget their original purpose. > > Studies on these types of tests show results in terms of hits and > statistical probabilty over chance (if that's the right terminology) > rather than clear cut "success or failure" results. > > Experiemnts would have to designed that allow for the uncontrollable > and unrepeatable aspects of these types of experiences, yet still > be able to achieve significant statistical results to satisfy hard > nosed scientists. A tall order! If the best you can come up with is a > statistical probablity that is only a little better than chance after > several years of experiemts, you'll probably find you still haven't > convinced anyone of much. Hard nosed skeptics will likely say things > like "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" (or > something along those lines) and you won't be much further along than > when you first started. This is the reality for many of the "psi" > experiemnts that have occured to date. > > Perhaps some sort of major paradigm shift in scientific views will be > required first before these types of experiments begin to be taken > seriously by the scientific community at large. Although we may be > getting close to such a paradigm shift already, with all the new > theories and ideas that are being thrown around in quantum mechanics > and the like these days. I agree with you about the difficulty of studying these experiences under controlled conditions. It seems to me that researchers who are trying to understand how the brain and the mind work have one of the toughest jobs in science. At this stage, it seems that, as far as OBEs are concerned, the best that can be done is to gather as many accounts as possible and see what emerges from statistical analysis. Certainly, 'hidden target' tests of the ability to acquire information through paranormal means, based on the projection hypothesis, have been inconclusive at best. However, in exploring the possible consequences of the hypothesis that other planes or dimensions, or even alternate universes exist, we must consider the physical effects that these might have if there is a connection with this universe. If they are real, then we can assume that they are composed of matter and energy which are subject to the same laws which govern our own universe. We might expect, for example, that an alternate universe would have a considerable effect on our own in terms of gravitation, for example. In fact, a believer might want to argue that an alternate universe could account for the "missing mass" of this universe which is currently explained by hypothetical "dark matter". It's certainly something I would like to see discussed by those much better versed in physics than I am. Ian Ian H Spedding ============== ###### From: ian_spedding@lineone.net (Ian H Spedding) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: 27 Aug 2001 02:44:48 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 37 Message-ID: <593da164.0108270144.722c463c@posting.google.com> References: <593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.6.80.140 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 998905488 19551 127.0.0.1 (27 Aug 2001 09:44:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 Aug 2001 09:44:48 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!Amsterdam.Infonet!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!skynet.be!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70817 "William Bliss" wrote in message news:... > "Ian H Spedding" wrote in message > news:593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com... > [...] > > It also means that the two > > dimensions or planes must influence each other in ways that should be > > observable and measurable. Only of the two dimensions were completely > > isolated from each other would this not be true, but in that case we > > would not be able to visit them and we would know nothing about them. > > I agree with your assertion, but many subtle assumptions are > hidden behind it. When projectors "shift their dimension" and > find themselves in the same astral world (w/o needing to travel) > we are drawn to the conclusion that these other dimensions > must be moving with Earth, and maybe they are. But this doesn't > require that these astral structures add to Earths gravitational > well, or produce other easily observable interaction phenomena. I'm not so sure. It seems to me that an object as massive as an alternate universe, say, couldn't help but influence ours if there was some form of connection. As far as I understand it, there is no way to isolate an object from the effects of the space-time distortion we call gravitation. Even hypothetical 'shortcuts' such as Miguel Alcubierre's "warp drive" solution and wormholes require huge amounts of energy which would itself be observable, I would have thought. The alternative suggestion, that there are astral planes or dimensions which have no physical manifestation, faces the problem of how are they to be distinguished from a variant of the dream-state, which is the more economical explaantion. Ian Ian H Spedding ============== ###### From: "William Bliss" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body References: <593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com> <593da164.0108270144.722c463c@posting.google.com> Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Lines: 60 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 Message-ID: X-Trace: NjAgTm9BdXRoVXNlciBURUxPQ0lUWS1SRUFERVJTIDY0LjM0LjIzOC4yMjUgIE1vbiwgMjcgQXVn!IDIwMDEgMDk6NTE6NDUgUERU X-Abuse-Info: Please forward ALL headers when reporting abuse. X-Complaints-To: abuse@bb.directv.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 09:51:45 PDT Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 12:46:17 -0400 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newscore.gigabell.net!news0.de.colt.net!colt.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-hog.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!nntp-relay.ihug.net!ihug.co.nz!telocity-west!TELOCITY!newsrump.sjc.telocity.net!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70834 "Ian H Spedding" wrote in message news:593da164.0108270144.722c463c@posting.google.com... > "William Bliss" wrote in message news:... > > "Ian H Spedding" wrote in message > > news:593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com... > > > [...] > > > > It also means that the two > > > dimensions or planes must influence each other in ways that should be > > > observable and measurable. Only of the two dimensions were completely > > > isolated from each other would this not be true, but in that case we > > > would not be able to visit them and we would know nothing about them. > > > > I agree with your assertion, but many subtle assumptions are > > hidden behind it. When projectors "shift their dimension" and > > find themselves in the same astral world (w/o needing to travel) > > we are drawn to the conclusion that these other dimensions > > must be moving with Earth, and maybe they are. But this doesn't > > require that these astral structures add to Earths gravitational > > well, or produce other easily observable interaction phenomena. > > I'm not so sure. It seems to me that an object as massive as an > alternate universe, say, couldn't help but influence ours if there was > some form of connection. As far as I understand it, there is no way > to isolate an object from the effects of the space-time distortion we > call gravitation. Maybe we should place a projection target (digital clock?) inside a large vacuum chamber. Projectors could then see if they fell at 10(m/ss) (when they weren't trying to fly, that is). Robert Monroe tried to detect his OOB weight but didn't know whether air molecules might be slowing his fall (terminal velocity). He came to the conclusion that his astral body couldn't weigh more than a few grams (AFAICR). The real point I wish to make is that it might be rather egotistical for today's scientists to assume that they have found all of the Universe's fields and structures. IMHO, there is MUCH that is still unknown about the nature of space and matter. > Even hypothetical 'shortcuts' such as Miguel > Alcubierre's "warp drive" solution and wormholes require huge amounts > of energy which would itself be observable, I would have thought. > > The alternative suggestion, that there are astral planes or dimensions > which have no physical manifestation, faces the problem of how are > they to be distinguished from a variant of the dream-state, which is > the more economical explaantion. Granted! Psychic research is a more risky field than most. I wonder if Isaac Newton would've considered his polarized arrows theory of light to be more economical then QED? Wm ###### From: spamnot@nothanks.com (Aphasic Orator) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Message-ID: <3b8af09a.6453932@news1.on.sympatico.ca> References: <593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com> <3b892785.612847@news1.on.sympatico.ca> <593da164.0108270121.5f161e82@posting.google.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.21/32.243 Lines: 32 Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 01:31:18 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.92.66.7 X-Complaints-To: abuse@sympatico.ca X-Trace: news20.bellglobal.com 998961968 65.92.66.7 (Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:26:08 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 21:26:08 EDT Organization: Bell Sympatico 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!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.sovam.com!nf1.bellglobal.com!nf2.bellglobal.com!news20.bellglobal.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70856 On 27 Aug 2001 02:21:31 -0700, ian_spedding@lineone.net (Ian H Spedding) wrote: >However, in exploring the possible consequences of the hypothesis that >other planes or dimensions, or even alternate universes exist, we must >consider the physical effects that these might have if there is a >connection with this universe. If they are real, then we can assume >that they are composed of matter and energy which are subject to the >same laws which govern our own universe. Well, I'm not sure I could make that kind of an assumption. Real to you seems to mean an extension of physical reality? It seems to me that these other hypothetical dimensions could be real but be subject to completely different laws. They may not even interact directly with physical reality. When we are talking about the unknown, how can we make assumptions, unless the assumptions are just for the purpose of seeing where they lead us? >We might expect, for example, that an alternate universe would have a >considerable effect on our own in terms of gravitation, for example. >In fact, a believer might want to argue that an alternate universe >could account for the "missing mass" of this universe which is >currently explained by hypothetical "dark matter". It's certainly >something I would like to see discussed by those much better versed in >physics than I am. It's an interesting idea, but not something I know much about! /ao ###### From: Ian H Spedding Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 20:11:51 +0100 Message-ID: References: <593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com> <3b892785.612847@news1.on.sympatico.ca> <593da164.0108270121.5f161e82@posting.google.com> <3b8af09a.6453932@news1.on.sympatico.ca> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 NNTP-Posting-Host: host62-6-76-12.dialup.lineone.co.uk X-Trace: 28 Aug 2001 20:08:39 +0100, host62-6-76-12.dialup.lineone.co.uk Lines: 47 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news-lei1.dfn.de!news-fra1.dfn.de!news0.de.colt.net!colt.net!dispose.news.demon.net!demon!mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com!host62-6-76-12.dialup.lineone.co.uk Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70890 In article <3b8af09a.6453932@news1.on.sympatico.ca>, spamnot@nothanks.com says... > On 27 Aug 2001 02:21:31 -0700, ian_spedding@lineone.net (Ian H > Spedding) wrote: > > >However, in exploring the possible consequences of the hypothesis that > >other planes or dimensions, or even alternate universes exist, we must > >consider the physical effects that these might have if there is a > >connection with this universe. If they are real, then we can assume > >that they are composed of matter and energy which are subject to the > >same laws which govern our own universe. > > Well, I'm not sure I could make that kind of an assumption. Real to > you seems to mean an extension of physical reality? It seems to me > that these other hypothetical dimensions could be real but be subject > to completely different laws. They may not even interact directly with > physical reality. When we are talking about the unknown, how can > we make assumptions, unless the assumptions are just for the purpose > of seeing where they lead us? We can say certain things about other physical realities based upon what we have learnt about this one. For example, we now know that the structure of matter in this universe is crucially dependent on the values of the forces which bind matter together at a sub-atomic level. If those values varied by just a little, this universe, including us, could not exist, so any alternate physical reality which has the same appearance as ours is likely to have the same structure and be governed by the same laws. On the other hand, if that alternate reality appeared the same, but was composed of anti-matter, the two sides could not come into physical contact in any way without both sides being annihilated by being converted entirely into radiation. Since this does not happen in OBEs, we can assume that, if an alternative physical reality is being visited, it isn't composed of anti-matter. If an alternative reality has a physical existence in any accepted meaning of the term, then it is made of matter and energy, at least. That implies mass, and the gravitational distortion that mass causes to space-time, and electromagnetic radiation, all of which should be observable. Ian Ian H Spedding ============== ###### Message-ID: <3B8D006C.A66E16F9@home.com> From: Suzanne Organization: @Home Network X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en]C-AtHome0405 (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) References: <593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 19 Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 14:50:22 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.64.59.86 X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net X-Trace: news2.rdc1.ab.home.com 999096622 24.64.59.86 (Wed, 29 Aug 2001 07:50:22 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 07:50:22 PDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!fr.clara.net!heighliner.fr.clara.net!diablo.netcom.net.uk!netcom.net.uk!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newshub2.rdc1.sfba.home.com!news.home.com!news2.rdc1.ab.home.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70903 > > > Various woo-woo groups have put considerable effort into > thinking about the many various (seemingly contradictory) > quandaries such as you've proposed here. My main point > being, that having an interest in the analysis of theories, whose > purpose is explaining a wide array of anecdotal phenomena, > does not (necessarily) indicate a person is stupid, naive or > unscientific. Having an interest in woo-woo gedanken experiments > could simply mean that a person likes difficult & risky intellectual > challenges. > > Wm Hey...that really sounded good William! Suzanne ###### From: spamnot@nothanks.com (Aphasic Orator) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Message-ID: <3b8d715e.468858@news1.on.sympatico.ca> References: <593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com> <3b892785.612847@news1.on.sympatico.ca> <593da164.0108270121.5f161e82@posting.google.com> <3b8af09a.6453932@news1.on.sympatico.ca> X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.21/32.243 Lines: 67 Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 23:33:40 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.92.92.210 X-Complaints-To: abuse@sympatico.ca X-Trace: news20.bellglobal.com 999128027 65.92.92.210 (Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:33:47 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 19:33:47 EDT Organization: Bell Sympatico Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!newsfeed.sovam.com!nf1.bellglobal.com!nf2.bellglobal.com!news20.bellglobal.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70958 On Tue, 28 Aug 2001 20:11:51 +0100, Ian H Spedding wrote: >In article <3b8af09a.6453932@news1.on.sympatico.ca>, >spamnot@nothanks.com says... >> On 27 Aug 2001 02:21:31 -0700, ian_spedding@lineone.net (Ian H >> Spedding) wrote: >> >> >However, in exploring the possible consequences of the hypothesis that >> >other planes or dimensions, or even alternate universes exist, we must >> >consider the physical effects that these might have if there is a >> >connection with this universe. If they are real, then we can assume >> >that they are composed of matter and energy which are subject to the >> >same laws which govern our own universe. >> >> Well, I'm not sure I could make that kind of an assumption. Real to >> you seems to mean an extension of physical reality? It seems to me >> that these other hypothetical dimensions could be real but be subject >> to completely different laws. They may not even interact directly with >> physical reality. When we are talking about the unknown, how can >> we make assumptions, unless the assumptions are just for the purpose >> of seeing where they lead us? > >We can say certain things about other physical realities based >upon what we have learnt about this one. For example, we now >know that the structure of matter in this universe is crucially >dependent on the values of the forces which bind matter together >at a sub-atomic level. If those values varied by just a little, >this universe, including us, could not exist, so any alternate >physical reality which has the same appearance as ours is likely >to have the same structure and be governed by the same laws. > >On the other hand, if that alternate reality appeared the same, >but was composed of anti-matter, the two sides could not come >into physical contact in any way without both sides being >annihilated by being converted entirely into radiation. Since >this does not happen in OBEs, we can assume that, if an >alternative physical reality is being visited, it isn't composed >of anti-matter. > >If an alternative reality has a physical existence in any >accepted meaning of the term, then it is made of matter and >energy, at least. That implies mass, and the gravitational >distortion that mass causes to space-time, and electromagnetic >radiation, all of which should be observable. > >Ian Hi Ian, I appreciate what you are saying, but it still seems to me that there are some inherent assumptions in this view, such as if it is real, it must follow the laws that apply to the physical dimensions we call physical reality. If we are strictly limiting our discussion to other "physical" dimensions as yet undiscovered, then, by definition, these dimensions should be expected to be subject to the physical laws we are subject to here. In such a case I would agree. However if we take a less restricted view about the hypothetical dimensions that may be visited in OBE's, and allowing that they might be real, it still seems to me that we would need to show some sort of direct relationship to our physical reality first before we started making predictions about how things should work in these dimensions. However, I am not a scientist so I realize I may be way off base here! It's interesting stuff to think about though. I am still trying to wrap my head around the concept that outer space is an apparent infinite expanse. :-) /ao ###### From: "William Bliss" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body References: <593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com> <3b892785.612847@news1.on.sympatico.ca> <593da164.0108270121.5f161e82@posting.google.com> <3b8af09a.6453932@news1.on.sympatico.ca> Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Lines: 39 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 Message-ID: X-Trace: MzkgTm9BdXRoVXNlciBURUxPQ0lUWS1SRUFERVJTIDY0LjM0LjIzOC4yMjUgIFRodSwgMzAgQXVn!IDIwMDEgMDg6NDc6NDggUERU X-Abuse-Info: Please forward ALL headers when reporting abuse. X-Complaints-To: abuse@bb.directv.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 08:47:48 PDT Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 11:42:17 -0400 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp-relay.ihug.net!ihug.co.nz!telocity-west!TELOCITY!newsrump.sjc.telocity.net!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:71022 "Ian H Spedding" wrote in message news:MPG.15f5fcd9f4930a83989716@news.lineone.net... [...] > If an alternative reality has a physical existence in any > accepted meaning of the term, I too prefer the notion that astral-entities are made out of something, but use of the word "physical" may be dangerous. > then it is made of matter and energy, at least. Energy is defined as a quantity that is conserved in a closed system -comprised of a set of related objects. The relation between these "objects" seems to be the psi probability wave, AFAIK. >That implies mass, and the gravitational > distortion that mass causes to space-time, and electromagnetic > radiation, all of which should be observable. There are interesting ways of thinking about mass that are less restrictive. * Mass can be thought of as a quantity of energy that must be absorbed before a psi wave can change its shape and orientation. * At a deeper level, mass can be thought of as a conservation rule for frequency (mcc=E=hf). This suggests the view that psi waves can collide and exchange frequency. There are a few other even weirder ways of thinking about mainstream physics that allow for a multidimensional Universe, But I'm out of time. Take care Wm ###### From: ian_spedding@lineone.net (Ian H Spedding) Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: 30 Aug 2001 15:04:16 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Lines: 45 Message-ID: <593da164.0108301404.61139cef@posting.google.com> References: <593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com> <3b892785.612847@news1.on.sympatico.ca> <593da164.0108270121.5f161e82@posting.google.com> <3b8af09a.6453932@news1.on.sympatico.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.123.55.171 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 999209056 32439 127.0.0.1 (30 Aug 2001 22:04:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 30 Aug 2001 22:04:16 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70988 "William Bliss" wrote in message news:... > "Ian H Spedding" wrote in message > news:MPG.15f5fcd9f4930a83989716@news.lineone.net... > [...] > > If an alternative reality has a physical existence in any > > accepted meaning of the term, > > I too prefer the notion that astral-entities are made out of > something, but use of the word "physical" may be dangerous. > > > then it is made of matter and energy, at least. > > Energy is defined as a quantity that is conserved in a closed > system -comprised of a set of related objects. The relation > between these "objects" seems to be the psi probability wave, > AFAIK. When I was at school, which admittedly was quite a while ago, energy was defined as the capacity to perform work. > >That implies mass, and the gravitational > > distortion that mass causes to space-time, and electromagnetic > > radiation, all of which should be observable. > > There are interesting ways of thinking about mass that are > less restrictive. > > * Mass can be thought of as a quantity of energy that must > be absorbed before a psi wave can change its shape and > orientation. > * At a deeper level, mass can be thought of as a conservation > rule for frequency (mcc=E=hf). This suggests the view that psi > waves can collide and exchange frequency. > > There are a few other even weirder ways of thinking about > mainstream physics that allow for a multidimensional Universe, > But I'm out of time. Isn't there also something about mass being the result of the 'drag' that is caused by movement through a Higgs field? Ian Ian H Spedding =============== ###### From: Janice Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Message-ID: References: <593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com> <3b892785.612847@news1.on.sympatico.ca> <593da164.0108270121.5f161e82@posting.google.com> <3b8af09a.6453932@news1.on.sympatico.ca> <593da164.0108301404.61139cef@posting.google.com> X-Newsreader: MicroPlanet Gravity v2.50 Lines: 37 NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 21:08:48 CDT Organization: Giganews.Com - Premium News Outsourcing X-Trace: sv3-tvrEGbOMQemuJUoczAe2nMbjESzZUOQC+ZUEHzTi0uwYJbnS84rCzxajQI+u2+zStQF5+XN4flbp6pA!98FDMcpN8+IfXKD2mxYn9Q1jssP8MV/SfbituoRE3hVmmXHj930I0O56Q6EN19qEdC0Atq58C+YX!/l3xgfDtWA== X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html 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, 30 Aug 2001 22:12:56 -0400 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!cyclone-sjo1.usenetserver.com!usenetserver.com!border1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp3.aus1.giganews.com!news6.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:71005 In article <593da164.0108301404.61139cef@posting.google.com>, ian_spedding@lineone.net says... > "William Bliss" wrote in message news:... > > "Ian H Spedding" wrote in message > > news:MPG.15f5fcd9f4930a83989716@news.lineone.net... > > [...] > > > If an alternative reality has a physical existence in any > > > accepted meaning of the term, > > > > I too prefer the notion that astral-entities are made out of > > something, but use of the word "physical" may be dangerous. > > > > > then it is made of matter and energy, at least. > > > > Energy is defined as a quantity that is conserved in a closed > > system -comprised of a set of related objects. The relation > > between these "objects" seems to be the psi probability wave, > > AFAIK. > > When I was at school, which admittedly was quite a while ago, energy > was defined as the capacity to perform work. That's what they told me, too. Sound like some socialist definition now. ;) -- While good fortune often eludes you, bad fortune never misses.--Despair, Inc. My homepage: http://sites.netscape.net/jayavogelsong/ The alt.out-of-body newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/index.html The alt.dreams.lucid newsgroup homepage: http://www.geocities.com/janice240obe/home.html ###### From: "William Bliss" Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body References: <593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com> <3b892785.612847@news1.on.sympatico.ca> <593da164.0108270121.5f161e82@posting.google.com> <3b8af09a.6453932@news1.on.sympatico.ca> <593da164.0108301404.61139cef@posting.google.com> Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Lines: 42 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 Message-ID: X-Trace: XFpIJgcpHRwAPRsNGkg8LSQnKyE8MUU6LSksLTo7SF5cRltcRlpbUEZaWl1ISDwAHURIW1hIKR0P!SFpYWFlIWVFSXF1SXVFIOCw8 X-Abuse-Info: Please forward ALL headers when reporting abuse. X-Complaints-To: abuse@bb.directv.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:45:59 PDT Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 22:40:24 -0400 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!howland.erols.net!cyclone2.usenetserver.com!usenetserver.com!telocity-west!TELOCITY!newsrump.sjc.telocity.net!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:71000 "Janice" wrote in message news:MPG.15f8bcaf5c4d66e2989aec@news.starlinx.com... > In article <593da164.0108301404.61139cef@posting.google.com>, > ian_spedding@lineone.net says... > > "William Bliss" wrote in message news:... > > > "Ian H Spedding" wrote in message > > > news:MPG.15f5fcd9f4930a83989716@news.lineone.net... > > > [...] > > > > If an alternative reality has a physical existence in any > > > > accepted meaning of the term, > > > > > > I too prefer the notion that astral-entities are made out of > > > something, but use of the word "physical" may be dangerous. > > > > > > > then it is made of matter and energy, at least. > > > > > > Energy is defined as a quantity that is conserved in a closed > > > system -comprised of a set of related objects. The relation > > > between these "objects" seems to be the psi probability wave, > > > AFAIK. > > > > When I was at school, which admittedly was quite a while ago, energy > > was defined as the capacity to perform work. > > That's what they told me, too. Sound like some socialist definition now. Sorry for the confusion. I wrote too fast. I was trying to demonstrate the idea that the entire concept of energy might be restricted to just one set of related physical principles, IOW one closed system. Other different closed systems (or mostly closed) might have their own conservation rules and very small cross terms. Defining E as the ability to do work is, of course, the old school standard, but it has a circular feeling. Work is a Force through a distance and a Force is a gradient of potential energy and potential energy is just another form of energy, so where have we gotten? Wm ###### From: Crowfoot Newsgroups: alt.out-of-body Subject: Re: Quantum OOBE? (Was re: question) Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:01:09 -0700 Organization: Southwest Cyberport Lines: 15 Message-ID: <9moff7$n0v$4@sloth.swcp.com> References: <593da164.0108252329.70803fa2@posting.google.com> <3b892785.612847@news1.on.sympatico.ca> <593da164.0108270121.5f161e82@posting.google.com> <3b8af09a.6453932@news1.on.sympatico.ca> <593da164.0108301404.61139cef@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: q13-21.swcp.com User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.0 (PPC) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news-lei1.dfn.de!news-was.dfn.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-xfer.siscom.net!feeder.nmix.net!feeder.swcp.com!sloth.swcp.com!suzych Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.out-of-body:70928 In article , "William Bliss" wrote: At the risk of sounding like an idjit, William, let me ask you -- is there a theory out there these days that proposes the idea (excuse my clumsy language and probably clumsy thinking here, I am not any sort of scientist) that energy is the basic "stuff" out of which the universe is made and that matter is energy clotted together very tightly, that is, very sticky energy? Just a thought. Crow -- Crow