• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

Near-Death Experiences Explained?

Free episodes:

I would like to try and explain NDE based on my thesis of body and soul.

This thesis revolves around the following points.

1. The material body can exist only in the present time space. It cannot enter into the past or the future physically.
2. The soul or the neu ( a form of neutrino) can exist in any time space and is basically indestructible.
3. The neu permanently contains the DNA of consciousness of the person.
4. When a person dies, this means both the heart and the brain has stopped functioning.
5. The body by the functioning of the brain, keeps the neu in the current time space and within the bounds of the body weak electromagnetic force.

When a person dies, the current time space ceases to exist for the person and the neu enters another time space instantly in a fraction of a second entering a new mortal body.

However, in certain cases though the heart has stopped functioning; the brain may not have entirely stopped functioning.

In this situation, the current time space has not been destroyed and the neu is in a borderline state where it is still in the current time space and yet it is free from the influence of the body (due to the weakening of the brain's EM).

The neu becomes a free spirit for a temporary period of time with full consciousness and the person feels still alive.

Once the person is reviewed; meaning the heart starts pumping again and the brain runs in full steam, the neu is recaptured by the brains EM and the person becomes mortally consciousness.

Once the neu is back into the body, it transfers the out of body experience to the brain and the person recollects the experience.

Since momentarily, the neu is in the state of a free spirit (also called by eastern religions as Moksha), it can experience just about anything that is happening in the present time space or any other time spaces as well. And these are also recollected once the person is reviewed.

Again this is a theory based on personal experience.
 
can you take any claim of disembodied consciousness and counterclaim NLP or super-psi or some other explantion? I think so because disembodied consciousness can't make any unambiguous claims on the physical.

What are 'NLP'? I've just been skimming this thread trying to catch up. 'Super-psi' can't be claimed until it can be demonstrated, and it hasn't been. The superpsi hypothesis was proposed by SPR sceptics as a last-ditch alternative to the survival hypothesis supported by the demonstrated veridicality of information received from a number of discarnates through mediums.


Stephen Braude in Immortal Remains: The Evidence for Life After Death examines both hypotheses relative to major veridical cases supportive of survival. As one reviewer summarizes it:

"Although most cases end in a stalemate between survival and super-psi, Braude hesitantly favours survival since super-psi would inevitably suffer from "crippling complexity" - i.e. super-psi requires multiple casual chains which would be vulnerable to a huge array of obstacles, unlike the survival hypothesis which requires only the integrity of a single causal connection between the psychic subject and a post-mortem individual.
Whatever difficulties people find with Braude's analytical style, books like his are essential to advance the study of this vital issue and give it the intellectual and philosophical depth it deserves. Essential reading."



For those seriously interested in the question of survival of consciousness, this book is a major contribution to the research and well worth the time required to read it.

 
I Googled:

"third person point of view in out of body experiences"

Some interesting results ensued, among them:

What Happens When Memories Aren't Seen In First-Person? Out-Of-Body Experiences Are Harder To Remember

"It’s a pretty unusual thing to consider: Our memories — the lasting ones, at least — are all seen from a first-person point-of-view. So, is it possible to remember things we experience from an out-of-body, third-person point-of-view? With implications for people with psychiatric conditions, researchers have now found that our memories tend to fail us when we’re not experiencing them in the first-person."

Relevant? Or are you using third person POV in another sense?

That experiment might have some significance for psychologists and psychiatrists attempting to account for the 'perceptions' of psychotic patients, but it has limited relevance for the understanding of actual OBEs occurring spontaneously in psychologically 'normal' people. It is interesting, however, that in the experiment those visually manipulated to experience a 'virtual OBE' do not remember much from that which was presented to them visually during that 'virtual' experience. This could be because they are distracted by seeing the virtual representation of their bodies and thus unable to 'pay attention' to the information/activity/representations also being generated in their visual field. It could also be a result of their knowing that the key part of what is being represented -- the virtual OBE -- is unreal.

I can say, with Burnt, that my single OBE, which was a spontaneous experience, was riveting and totally consuming throughout its duration, and that all of the details I observed during it remain as clear to me now as they were during the experience 40 years ago.

@Burnt State, would you describe in more detail what you experienced, saw, thought during your OBE?

Re the question of a 'third-person perspective'* on one's body when one is observing it from a location out of the body, I can say based on my own OBE that while I did indeed observe my body across the room, still sitting at the desk where I had been reading, I had no sense of my body being 'alive' or accessible to control by my consciousness up near the ceiling. My body and its whole context (the desk at which I sat, facing the far wall, my blue tweed coat hanging over the back of the chair I was sitting on) seemed inert, out of time. As my conscious point of view moved along the opposite wall near the ceiling, from the far corner of the room to a position more directly behind my body, my body did not seem to exist in the same 'temporal' dimension my mind was functioning in. My physical body seemed to be frozen in time from the moment my consciousness first viewed it from across the room, whereas my mental point of view on it was experientially temporal as in normal consciousness -- except that time seemed to pass more slowly during the duration of the OBE. That could have been the result of my astonishment at the peculiarity of finding my consciousness so far outside my body. As I said, my attention was riveted moment by moment to what was happening in my visual field.

I've reported this experience elsewhere in the paracast forums and included the information that, after moving toward a the position more directly behind my body, I encountered a separate (but apparently not wholly separate) consciousness and briefly overheard 'her' thoughts before I suddenly found myself back in my body and back in normal embodied time.

*But I should clarify, re the question of a 'third-person' point of view, that I never felt completely disassociated from my body during the OBE (as if it was someone else). I knew that it was my body I was observing from across the room and I did not feel alienated from it, nor particularly concerned with it (the same attitude expressed by the other consciousness I encountered at the end of the OBE).
 
Last edited:
@smcder, re the references to those claiming to have experienced a 360-degree field of vision around themselves, I've read reports of this both by several contemporary NDEers and also in historical post-mortem descriptions conveyed by soldiers killed on WWI battlefields who found themselves rising up in some form out of their bodies and seeing simultaneously in all directions around them. These reports were conveyed through mediums and also through automatic writing in England and in Germany. In several of them, those reporting such experiences also described seeing other soldiers rising out of their bodies in some form and their banding together to find their way out of the battlefield.
 
@smcder

So many good thoughts and questions.

Regarding the "limited omniscient" perspective: I don't think a disembodied consciousness would logically have this perspective. I was mostly offering that as a counter question. Why should the pov of a disembodied consciousness—as reported—be so similar to an embodied consciousness?

I've never seen the limited omnicient perspective portrayed in any media. I'd be curious to see how it's done. I do watch a show called Person of Interest which is about two AI that are connected to the survellience infrastructure of NYC. I have wondered what their pov would be like. Incidentally, I've also wondered "where" their minds would be located.

I think your question re the consciousness being embodied/disembodied or in/out is a great one. Two thoughts:

(1) I believe the current thinking is that the brain/CNS has to constantly map our sense of body ownership onto our bodies. There's a good bit of research about this:

It’s Behind You! Robot Creates Feeling of Ghostly Presence – Phenomena: Not Exactly Rocket Science

As you read this, you know that you are located inside your own body—a feeling so ingrained that it seems facile and absurd to even state it. But it turns out that your brain continuously constructs a feeling of body ownership, and that this seemingly hard-wired sensation is actually rather brittle.Scientists can easily disrupt it through simple illusions, which convince people that they’ve swapped bodies with a partner or are having an out-of-body experience. Blanke wondered if he could develop an illusion that could make a healthy person feel a ghostly presence.​

So, it's conceivable that in some cases of OBEs, this system is getting disrupted. However, in other cases of OBEs, the person reports a POV from a corner of the ceiling. So, not only is the sense of body misplaced... but the sensory information appears to be from the POV of the corner of the ceiling. That shouldn't be the case if this is merely our sense of body being disrupted. It doesn't explain the POV.

However, I have wondered if this perceived location change skews our POV sense as well. In other words, the sensory information may still be being gathered by the body laying on the table--sounds, smells, sights*, etc.--but since the sense of body has been mistakenly moved to the corner of the ceiling, perhaps the POV is mistaken to be from this location as well...

However, people who report seeing their bodies lying on a table from above would of course dispute that. They'd say that the POV was real. Although I do wonder...

(2) Technically, I don't think consciousness is "in" the body. I don't think consciousness is in the electrons, molecules, cells, neurons, or organs of our body. Technically, I would say consciousness was embodied by such physical things. For me, that leaves open the possibility that one's consciousness -- in parts or in whole -- could be embodied by other physical stuffs. Can someone's consciousness get imprinted on the environment, poltergeist style? Mayhaps. Could someone's consciousness be embodied somewheres else in the multiverse after the death of the body? I think it's possible. I couldn't begin to describe by which nature or teleological process this might happen, but I think it hypothetically could (and might!).

Lately I've been reading a lot of info about our sensory systems. Regarding the asterisk above beside sight:

Tasting the Light: Device Lets the Blind "See" with Their Tongues - Scientific American

Neuroscientist Paul Bach-y-Rita hypothesized in the 1960s that "we see with our brains not our eyes." Now, a new device trades on that thinking and aims to partially restore the experience of vision for the blind and visually impaired by relying on the nerves on the tongue's surface to send light signals to the brain. ...

From the CPU, the signals are sent to the tongue via a "lollipop," an electrode array about nine square centimeters that sits directly on the tongue. Each electrode corresponds to a set of pixels. White pixels yield a strong electrical pulse, whereas black pixels translate into no signal. Densely packed nerves at the tongue surface receive the incoming electrical signals, which feel a little like Pop Rocks or champagne bubbles to the user.
It remains unclear whether the information is then transferred to the brain's visual cortex, where sight information is normally sent, or to its somatosensory cortex, where touch data from the tongue is interpreted, Wicab neuroscientist Aimee Arnoldussen says. "We don't know with certainty," she adds. ...

Seiple works with four patients who train with the BrainPort once a week and notes that his patients have learned how to quickly find doorways and elevator buttons, read letters and numbers, and pick out cups and forks at the dinner table without having to fumble around. "At first, I was amazed at what the device could do," he said. "One guy started to cry when he saw his first letter."​

I first heard about this on the RadioLab podcast, and the individual definitely described "seeing" things. But who knows. Does it matter? Experience is experience. (Information is information...)

Is it possible that people lying on the operating table are pulling in sensory information from the environment--even with their eyes closed and their brain barely functioning--and their brains are trying to make--potentially life or death--meaning of this information? Eh, probably not. But I do wonder.

I also recently read an article about how there are olfactory cells literally all through the body, not just in the nose. All over our bodies and inside our bodies. We smell the inside of our bodies. Or maybe just our (creepily sentient) immune system does. I don't think we've know exactly how and in which ways our amazing bodies pull info from the environment.

Why do people report a particular POV located away from the body during OBEs? I'm not sure. I'll have to think about. If consciousness is disembodied, it would still -- if there was an accompanying sense of self -- need to have a POV, I think. If there was no sense of self, then there would be no POV, right?

I've never had an OBE or NDE. I have experienced sleep paralysis though. I was a few weeks after I experienced a traumatic event (and looking back on it now I may have been experiencing some minor PTSD symptoms). I woke up on my stomach fully conscious, but I could not move my body despite my best efforts. I think it lasted for maybe a minute. Very scary experience. My understanding is the body (ANS?) overrides or shuts down the motor cortex so we don't injure ourselves whilst sleeping, right? It definitely had a supernatural feel to it for me at the time as a young person. I think I put my bible under my bed the next night. :)
 
I would like to try and explain NDE based on my thesis of body and soul.

This thesis revolves around the following points.

1. The material body can exist only in the present time space. It cannot enter into the past or the future physically.
2. The soul or the neu ( a form of neutrino) can exist in any time space and is basically indestructible.
3. The neu permanently contains the DNA of consciousness of the person.
4. When a person dies, this means both the heart and the brain has stopped functioning.
5. The body by the functioning of the brain, keeps the neu in the current time space and within the bounds of the body weak electromagnetic force.

When a person dies, the current time space ceases to exist for the person and the neu enters another time space instantly in a fraction of a second entering a new mortal body.

However, in certain cases though the heart has stopped functioning; the brain may not have entirely stopped functioning.

In this situation, the current time space has not been destroyed and the neu is in a borderline state where it is still in the current time space and yet it is free from the influence of the body (due to the weakening of the brain's EM).

The neu becomes a free spirit for a temporary period of time with full consciousness and the person feels still alive.

Once the person is reviewed; meaning the heart starts pumping again and the brain runs in full steam, the neu is recaptured by the brains EM and the person becomes mortally consciousness.

Once the neu is back into the body, it transfers the out of body experience to the brain and the person recollects the experience.

Since momentarily, the neu is in the state of a free spirit (also called by eastern religions as Moksha), it can experience just about anything that is happening in the present time space or any other time spaces as well. And these are also recollected once the person is reviewed.

Again this is a theory based on personal experience.
Is the neu a partical? Can you say a little more about the "DNA of consciousness" that this neu contains?
 
. . . I know NDEs can be very similar to DMT experiences.

In what specific ways? I'm aware that DMT was offered in recent years as a possible prosaic explanation that could account for NDEs, but similarities are relatively few and relatively vague. Pim von Lommel wrote as follows in a paper in the Journal of Consciousness Studies preceding the publication of his book Consciousness After Death:

". . . NDE-like experiences have been reported after the use of drugs like ketamine(Jansen, 1996), LSD (Grof and Halifax, 1977), or mushrooms (Schr¨oter-Kunhardt, 1999). These induced experiences can result in a period of unconsciousness, but can also sometimes consist of perception of sound, light, or flashes of recollections from the past. These recollections, however, consist of fragmented and random memories unlike the panoramic life-review that can occur in NDE. Also, exceptionally out-of-body experiences can occur during induced experiences. However, transformational processes are rarely reported after induced experiences. Thus, induced experiences are not identical to NDE.

Another theory holds that NDE might be a changing state of consciousness
(transcendence, or the theory of continuity), in which memories, identity, and
cognition, with emotion, function independently from the unconscious body, and
retain the possibility of non-sensory perception. Obviously, during NDE enhanced
consciousness is experienced independently from the normal body-linked waking
consciousness."

http://pimvanlommel.nl/files/Nonlocal-Consciousness-article-JCS-2013.pdf
 
. . . Since momentarily, the neu is in the state of a free spirit (also called by eastern religions as Moksha), it can experience just about anything that is happening in the present time space or any other time spaces as well. And these are also recollected once the person is reviewed.

Hello CryptoGuru. Your theory re NDEs is very interesting and seems to have 'physical' support in terms of quantum 'phase space'. Here is an extract from the von Lommel paper I quoted above that characterizes this physically based interpretation:

". . . This is neither the place nor the time to go into quantum mechanics in more
detail, but I would like to discuss just some basic aspects of quantum physics,
because this seems necessary to understand my concept of the continuity of consciousness. About what I have explained until now, there seems to be a striking similarity between the content of several aspects of our consciousness
during NDE and some proven concepts in Quantum Mechanics, which have completely overturned the existing view of our material, manifest world, the
so-called real-space. It tells us that particles can propagate like waves, and so can
be described by a quantum mechanical wave function. It can be proven that light
in some experiments behaves like particles (photons), and in other experiments it
behaves like waves, and both experiments are true, which also means that there is
no objectivity, the consciousness of the researcher and his design of the experiment
define the result.

According to Bohr waves and particles are complementary aspects
of light (Bohr and Kalckar 1997). The experiment of Aspect and colleagues

(1982), based on Bell’s theorem, has established non-locality in quantum mechanics (non-local interconnectedness). Non-locality happens because all events are interrelated and influence each other, implicating that there are no local causes for an event. Phase-space is an invisible, non-local, higher-dimensional space consisting of wave-fields of probability, where every past and future event is available as a possibility. The quantum physicist David Bohm has called this dimension the implicate order of being (Bohm, 1980), and Ervin Laszlo has called these informational fields the zero-point-field or the quantum vacuum (Laszlo, 2003, 2004).

Within this so-called phase-space no matter is present, everything belongs to uncertainty, and neither measurements nor observations are possible by physicists
(Heisenberg, 1971). The act of observation instantly changes a probability into
an actuality by collapse of the wave function. Roger Penrose calls this resolution
of multiple possibilities into one definitive state “objective reduction” (Penrose,
1996). So it seems that no observation is possible without fundamentally changing
the observed subject; only subjectivity remains.

Quantum physics cannot explain the essence of consciousness nor the secret of
life, but in my concept it is helpful for understanding the transition between the
fields of consciousness in the phase-space (to be compared with the probability
fields as we know from quantum mechanics) and the body-linked waking consciousness in the real-space, because these are the two complementary aspects of consciousness (Walach and Hartmann, 2000).
Our whole and undivided consciousness with declarative memories finds its origin in, and is stored in this phase-space, and the brain only serves as a relay station for parts of our consciousness and parts of our memories to be received into our waking consciousness. This is like the Internet, which does not originate from the computer itself, but is only received by it. In this concept consciousness is not rooted in the measurable domain of physics, our manifest world. The eternal wave aspect of our indestructible consciousness in phase-space, with non-local interconnectedness, is inherently not measurable by physical means. The immeasurable can never be measured. This can be compared with gravitational forces, where only the physical effects can be measured, but the forces themselves are not directly demonstrable.

Life creates the transition from phase-space into our manifest real-space; according
to our hypothesis life creates, under normal daily conditions when we are awake, the possibility to receive only some parts of these fields of consciousness (waves) into or as our waking consciousness, which belongs to our physical body (particles). During life, our consciousness has an aspect of waves as well as of particles, and there is a permanent interaction between these two aspects of consciousness. When we die, our consciousness will no longer have an aspect of particles, but only an eternal aspect of waves. The interface between our consciousness and our body is eliminated.

This concept (von Lommel, 2004) is a complementary theory, like both the
wave and particle aspects of light, and not a dualistic theory. Subjective (conscious)
experiences and the corresponding objective physical properties are two
fundamentally different manifestations of one and the same underlying deeper
reality; they cannot be reduced to each other. The particle aspect, the physical
aspect of consciousness in the material world, originates from the wave aspect
of our consciousness from the phase-space by collapse of the wave function into
particles (“objective reduction”), and these can be measured by means of EEG,
MEG, fMRI, and PET scan. Different neuronal networks function as interface for different aspects of our consciousness, as can be demonstrated by changing images during these registrations of fMRI or PET scan. So the function of neuronal networks should be regarded as receivers and conveyors, not as retainers of consciousness and memories.


With this new concept about consciousness and the mind–brain relation all
reported elements of an NDE during cardiac arrest could be explained. This concept
is compatible with the non-local interconnectedness with fields of consciousness
of other persons in phase-space. This remote, non-local communication seems to
have been demonstrated scientifically by positioning subject pairs in two separate
Faraday chambers, which effectively rules out any electromagnetic transfer mechanism. A visual pattern-reversal stimulus is used to elicit visual evoked responses in the EEG registration of the stimulated subject, and this is instantaneously received by the non-stimulated subject resulting in an immediate change of activity in his EEG-registration (Thaheld, 2003; Wackermann et al., 2003).


In trying to understand this concept of quantum mechanical mutual interaction
between the invisible phase-space and our visible, material body, it seems appropriate to compare it with modern worldwide communication. There is a continuous exchange of objective information by means of electromagnetic fields for radio, TV, mobile telephone, or laptop computer. We are not consciously aware of the vast amounts of electromagnetic fields that constantly, day and night, exist around us and are even permeating us, as well as permeating structures like walls and buildings, also at this very moment. We only become aware of these electromagnetic informative fields at the moment we use our mobile telephone or by switching on our radio, TV, or laptop. What we receive is neither inside the instrument, nor in the components, but thanks to the receiver, the information from the electromagnetic fields becomes observable to our senses and hence perception occurs in our consciousness. The voice we hear over our telephone is not inside the telephone. The concert we hear over our radio is transmitted to our radio. The images and music we hear and see on TV are transmitted to our TV set. The Internet is not located inside our laptop.We can receive what is transmitted with the speed of light from a distance of some hundreds or thousands of miles. And if we switch off the TV set, the reception disappears, but the transmission continues. The information transmitted remains present within the electromagnetic fields. The connection has been interrupted, but it is not vanished and still can be received elsewhere by using another TV set (“non-locality”).

According to my concept, based on the universal reported aspects of consciousness
experienced during cardiac arrest, we can conclude that the informational
fields of our consciousness, consisting of waves, are rooted in phase-space, in an
invisible dimension without time and space, and are present around and through
us, permeating our body. They become available as our waking consciousness
only through our functioning brain in the shape of measurable and changing electromagnetic fields. Could our brain be compared to the TV set, which receives
electromagnetic waves and transforms them into image and sound? Could it as
well be compared to the TV camera, which transforms image and sound into electromagnetic waves? These waves hold the essence of all information, but are only perceivable by our senses through suitable instruments like camera and TV set. And as soon as the function of the brain has been lost, as in clinical death during a cardiac arrest or during brain death, memories and consciousness do still exist, but the reception ability is lost, the connection, or interface, is interrupted. Consciousness can be experienced during such a period of a non-functioning brain, and this is what we call an NDE. So in my concept consciousness is not physically rooted! . . . .

 
If the majority of what we see is a pre-recorded image then Steve's flying experience in dreams, my OOBE and the POV shifts from classic OOBE's could all be easily manufactured composites by a brain/body circumstance that is unique, perhaps stressed, perhaps under duress or while just simply dreaming.
oobe.jpg

Constance, In my out of body experience, which was entirely brief, I remember being curled up in a ball in my bedroom, early morning light streaming through the window and i am screaming full tilt, like you often do during night terrors. I was screaming and then looked up to see my sleeping body lying in bed. That of course produced an even bigger jolt to my perceptions - real sheer terror there - and then I was unconscious and woke up some time after that, the imprinting of the experience strong and immediate in my mind. But unlike the night terror where your pereceptions of consciousness feels split between the dream identity and the immobilzed body lying in bed, this OOBE did not produce any sensation from the sleeping body at all. It was a real 'corker' of an event. That kind of fear was only en par with those other brain manufactured terrors like hallucinations, or when the skeleton that was chasing you in your childhood dream is suddenly on top of you choking you when you wake up from the dream and your mom just turned on the lights but the skeleton is still there. Those are interesting moments that the brain can serve up for you. Tricky stuff that 'dreaming' brain.
oobe2.jpg

Thanks Soupie for that POV dislocation as that really places a whole new spin on the OOBE. It unfortunately does not answer all of the unique patterns where, while in temporary death, some folks claim to see other actions and events that unfold following their 'death' moment. Of course it's quite possible, that given the complex nature of sensory perceptions that whole new, and highly accurate composites of reality could be created that are based on mental recordings of that previous reality. Perhaps hearing or smelling is enough for an unconscious figure to still extrapolate and create new visual renders of reality that might come from a POV that may be part imagination and part pre-recording. When you think of that doctor's book whose OOBE he cites as Proof of Heaven it seems obvious to me in his story, that is very auditory, visual, with alterations in scale a la Alice in Wonderland, including his sensations as being a worm for eternity - well that's just common dream loop patterns IMHO - been there; done that.
2013-04-03-The-Doctor-Who-Went-To-Heaven-Part-2.jpg

So this discussion helps me to understand how a bunch of simple NDE's may merely be a product of the brain doing what it does best, interpreting reality as it needs to under odd circumstances, to help us learn or survive experiences by producing the interpretations of reality it thinks will help us in that moment.

But it does not answer in my mind all the NDE's I've read about or heard about that do seem to produce accurate information about realities that could not be known by the temporarily 'dead' perceiver.

The one unique feature from NDE'ers is their absolute callous approach to personal survival. I wonder if there is a brain chemistry event that alters people's survival and defense mechanisms to make them feel differently about mortality, the way that entheogens can also have this effect on those who are facing mortality or who in therapy use these substances to reclaim and dissolve past traumas. It's like some kind of strange reset button, that's for sure.
 
Last edited:
What are 'NLP'? I've just been skimming this thread trying to catch up. 'Super-psi' can't be claimed until it can be demonstrated, and it hasn't been. The superpsi hypothesis was proposed by SPR sceptics as a last-ditch alternative to the survival hypothesis supported by the demonstrated veridicality of information received from a number of discarnates through mediums.


Stephen Braude in Immortal Remains: The Evidence for Life After Death examines both hypotheses relative to major veridical cases supportive of survival. As one reviewer summarizes it:

"Although most cases end in a stalemate between survival and super-psi, Braude hesitantly favours survival since super-psi would inevitably suffer from "crippling complexity" - i.e. super-psi requires multiple casual chains which would be vulnerable to a huge array of obstacles, unlike the survival hypothesis which requires only the integrity of a single causal connection between the psychic subject and a post-mortem individual.
Whatever difficulties people find with Braude's analytical style, books like his are essential to advance the study of this vital issue and give it the intellectual and philosophical depth it deserves. Essential reading."



For those seriously interested in the question of survival of consciousness, this book is a major contribution to the research and well worth the time required to read it.


"What are 'NLP'? I've just been skimming this thread trying to catch up. 'Super-psi' can't be claimed until it can be demonstrated, and it hasn't been. The superpsi hypothesis was proposed by SPR sceptics as a last-ditch alternative to the survival hypothesis supported by the demonstrated veridicality of information received from a number of discarnates through mediums."

NLP is non local perception. I was trying to think of a case that could only be explained by disembodied consciousness as opposed to NLP or super psi and it seemed to me that lead us back to a fundamental problem in consciousness.

"Braude hesitantly favours survival since super-psi would inevitably suffer from "crippling complexity" - i.e. super-psi requires multiple casual chains which would be vulnerable to a huge array of obstacles, unlike the survival hypothesis which requires only the integrity of a single causal connection between the psychic subject and a post-mortem individual."

This is the kind of logic I'm looking for in terms of discriminating between explanations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Is the neu a partical? Can you say a little more about the "DNA of consciousness" that this neu contains?

The DNA of consciousness means what type of person you are, have been and will be in the future in terms of exhibiting positive or negative energy. The neu is a vessel of this DNA and one that passes on from one life time to another.
 
Doesn't that hinge on increasingly sensitive measures/definitions of "clinical death"? Also there are studies showing that hallucinogens actually decrease brain activity, aren't there?

I'm under the impression that eeg activity is a reliable indicator of activity levels below which consciousness is not considered possible. But--I also don't see how unusual instances of consciousness during diminished activity could be ruled out.

Yes, I recall having run across something about entheogens, contrary to expectation, seeming to suppress more brain activity than they stimulated. Interesting.

One of my takeaways in reading about the hallucinogenic experience is that the brain is capable of manufacturing (presumably) experiences that are more vivid, meaningful and "real"
than those induced by interacting with this thing we call reality. In fact, one aspect of LSD use that has given some researchers in the 50's and 60's cause for concern is that everyday consciousness can come across to the "tripper" as relatively pale and meaningless compared to peak experiences on "acid". The user may therefore lose interest in those more conformist aspects of life valued by our culture.

An example: an engineer who, after a few LSD experiences, becomes utterly bored with his job and "drops out" to pursue whatever he or she may find artistically meaningful. This is not to be confused with classic drug addiction. The experiencer may in fact take a hallucinogen rarely if ever again for the rest of their lives, yet remain fundamentally changed. This is heady (no pun intended) stuff that should make us wonder where control of our own neural programming may take us.
 
Last edited:
Burnt.

If the majority of what we see is a pre-recorded image then Steve's flying experience in dreams, my OOBE and the POV shifts from classic OOBE's could all be easily manufactured composites by a brain/body circumstance that is unique, perhaps stressed, perhaps under duress or while just simply dreaming.


I remember this experience, i used to have that experience, i still have one very clear image in my head of one dream 40+ years later, dont know how old i was, but i moved out of the house 41 yr ago.

I remember arms out-stretched flying over the roof of the house and looking down the chimney pots as i did, sounds daft, but i remember the Ariel view of my whole manor.

Its gotta be a teenage thing, hormones or whatever, cos there were dreams that were just as real that ended in 'damp patches'.
 
Last edited:
The DNA of consciousness means what type of person you are, have been and will be in the future in terms of exhibiting positive or negative energy. The neu is a vessel of this DNA and one that passes on from one life time to another.
A few more questions:

Can you give an example of a person exhibiting positive energy and negative energy?

Is this neu a physical particle? If so, how is the differentiated information about "type of person" carried in one neu?

How does the information in the neu interact with the physical bodies it "attaches" to? What thoughts, feelings, and behaviors are attributed to the body-brain, and which are attributed to the neu?

Can the information in the neu -- type of person -- be modified? According to your comments above, it seems not.

In your previous post, you noted that when a neu becomes detached from a body it can experience anything that it might experience when attached to a body. How is a single particle able to have experiences? That is, lacking sensory organs, a nervous system, and a brain, how does a particle have experiences?

Are we to think of a neu as a homunculus?
 
A few more questions:

Can you give an example of a person exhibiting positive energy and negative energy?

Cryptoguru: "A person who is very religious and follows the scriptures is a person exhibiting positive energy. A person who indulges in Devil worship may be exhibiting negative energy. Most people fall in a grey area. Generally people engage in positive and negative energies in life. For example, you may help a friend and that is positive energy. But you may also shout at someone during the day and that is negative energy. You may be a doctor saving peoples lives and thus attract positive energy but you may also be eating meat and that constitutes negative energy.

Is this neu a physical particle? If so, how is the differentiated information about "type of person" carried in one neu?

Cryptoguru: Yes. According to my research, the neu is a physical particle similar to a neutrino which is very well explained in the following documentary.

\

How the differentiated information about "type of person" carried in one neu? Well scientists have already discovered how to directly transfer quantum information stored in an atom onto a particle of light. I believe Nature has learned how to do this with a particle smaller than a photon which is the neu or a form of neutrino.

How does the information in the neu interact with the physical bodies it "attaches" to? What thoughts, feelings, and behaviors are attributed to the body-brain, and which are attributed to the neu?

Cryptoguru: Honestly, I have not explored this in the depth you are asking for. But putting my thinking cap here, I would say everything that the brain senses is stored in the "neu" in the normal state. However, if the "neu" is sufficiently energized. it can gain information from other neural networks not only in the current time space but other dimensions as well and then pass it on to the brain.

Can the information in the neu -- type of person -- be modified? According to your comments above, it seems not.

Cryptoguru: If you mean if the person is negative or positive? Yes that evolves through the action of the conscious living being. For example at the time of birth and until the age of 3-5 years, the "neu" is completely positive except in rare exceptions. But as the baby becomes older and turns into an adult, the person through their actions can change the type of energy associated with the "neu" as positive or negative. Though the "neu" inherently is neutral in charge as a particle it can combine with negative or positive energies to turn into a different particle. This has been very clearly explained with neutrinos and the neu is not much different in nature from the neutrino or actually a form of neutrino that we have not yet discovered. More on the neutrino and different types are available on this wiki page Neutrino - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In your previous post, you noted that when a neu becomes detached from a body it can experience anything that it might experience when attached to a body. How is a single particle able to have experiences? That is, lacking sensory organs, a nervous system, and a brain, how does a particle have experiences?
Are we to think of a neu as a homunculus?


Cryptoguru: What I had mentioned is that when a "neu" is attached to a body, it is trapped in the current time space due to the influence of the body's weak forces acting on it and hence the consciousness exhibited is with respect to the current time space only.

However, when the "neu" is detached from the body, for a moment becomes it is instantly connected to an infinite energy source that is beyond time space and Universes. I call this the "Superverse". The Superverse is like a time space highway where a "neu" can tap into just about anything in the current, the past and the future.

The "neu" is the conscious being not the body. The body is merely a channel to exhibit consciousness and attract various forms of energies. But the "neu" is not sufficiently energized to be on it's own and gets easily bound to a living body or trapped you may say. But if through many life experiences, the neu can get sufficiently energized either positive or negative or become completely neutral. If it becomes completely negative in energy then it may become a dark spirit existing without a body and what we sometimes experience in various evil forms. And if it becomes completely positive in energy, we experience divine spiritual forms. The positive and negative forms are not permanent and may decay and get trapped once again into a material form.

Only when the neu turns into a completely neutral energy is when it becomes a Free Spirit and then on it can exist permanently in the Superverse.


 
An example: an engineer who, after a few LSD experiences, becomes utterly bored with his job and "drops out" to pursue whatever he or she may find artistically meaningful. This is not to be confused with classic drug addiction. The experiencer may in fact take a hallucinogen rarely if ever again for the rest of their lives, yet remain fundamentally changed. This is heady (no pun intended) stuff that should make us wonder where control of our own neural programming may take us.

Kind of off topic
I've kind of alluded to this elsewhere as far as my own life. While I do not take hallucogens, I do quite often have a very active and at times lucid but nearly always vivid dream life, and faithfully record then for going on five years now. I very much look forward to going to bed at night and while this hasn't altered my worldly pov as far as what I need to do and my responsibilities to myself and others I have found myself many, many times thinking how unfortunate it was that I couldn't keep dreaming. That's without any hallucinogens. I have to wonder what my feelings would be if I did make that jump. Would I be a strong enough person to find an acceptable compromise and go tripping and also fulfill my obligations to society or would I be a burden on it?
 
Burnt.

If the majority of what we see is a pre-recorded image then Steve's flying experience in dreams, my OOBE and the POV shifts from classic OOBE's could all be easily manufactured composites by a brain/body circumstance that is unique, perhaps stressed, perhaps under duress or while just simply dreaming.


I remember this experience, i used to have that experience, i still have one very clear image in my head of one dream 40+ years later, dont know how old i was, but i moved out of the house 41 yr ago.

I remember arms out-stretched flying over the roof of the house and looking down the chimney pots as i did, sounds daft, but i remember the Ariel view of my whole manor.

Its gotta be a teenage thing, hormones or whatever, cos there were dreams that were just as real that ended in 'damp patches'.
hormonally teens are off the charts in terms of altered brain chemistry. add into the mix their experimentation with various substances and life experiences it's not a wonder that night terrors and lucid dreaming make their appearances at such ages. after all, if dreams are mostly about learning, or trying to help the waking brain learn and negotiate new skills and life experiences, then you can see why new experiences may translate into such strange and strong dream experiences.

each time i've ever started flying in a dream i always have a sudden lucid revelation of, "holy shit i'm flying in my dream!" and then i wake up immediately. wish i had the ability to stick around and manipulate the dream instead of being brought back to consciousness out of sheer surprise.
 
I'm under the impression that eeg activity is a reliable indicator of activity levels below which consciousness is not considered possible. But--I also don't see how unusual instances of consciousness during diminished activity could be ruled out.

Well that was the contention by the Proof of Heaven infamous neurosurgeon OOBE that i referenced above. His claim has always been that his EEG produced results that made his personal experiences impossible to have taken place except in some altered OOBE reality.

But as a skeptical counter to his predicament:
"coma does not equate to “inactivation of the cerebral cortex” or “higher-order brain functions totally offline” or “neurons of [my] cortex stunned into complete inactivity”. These describe brain death, a one hundred percent lethal condition. …

We are not privy to his EEG records, but high alpha activity is common in coma. Also common is “flat” EEG. The EEG can appear flat even in the presence of high activity, when that activity is not synchronous. For example, the EEG flattens in regions involved in direct task processing. This phenomenon is known as event-related desynchronization (hundreds of references).

As is obvious to you, this is truth by authority. Neurosurgeons, however, are rarely well-trained in brain function. Dr. Alexander cuts brains; he does not appear to study them. “There is no scientific explanation for the fact that while my body lay in coma, my mind—my conscious, inner self—was alive and well. While the neurons of my cortex were stunned to complete inactivity by the bacteria that had attacked them, my brain-free consciousness …” True, science cannot explain brain-free consciousness. Of course, science cannot explain consciousness anyway. In this case, however, it would be parsimonious to reject the whole idea of consciousness in the absence of brain activity. Either his brain was active when he had these dreams, or they are a confabulation of whatever took place in his state of minimally conscious coma.

There are many reports of people remembering dream-like states while in medical coma. They lack consistency, of course, but there is nothing particularly unique in Dr. Alexander’s unfortunate episode."

from: Skeptic » Insight » “Proof of Heaven”?

If people can remember dreams from their comas, remember other humans talking to them etc. then we know that consciousness is a very robust platform with an ability to speculate about reality/circumstance and interpret it by feeding us back some helpful visual imagery for survival purposes.
 
Kind of off topic
I've kind of alluded to this elsewhere as far as my own life. While I do not take hallucogens, I do quite often have a very active and at times lucid but nearly always vivid dream life, and faithfully record then for going on five years now. I very much look forward to going to bed at night and while this hasn't altered my worldly pov as far as what I need to do and my responsibilities to myself and others I have found myself many, many times thinking how unfortunate it was that I couldn't keep dreaming. That's without any hallucinogens. I have to wonder what my feelings would be if I did make that jump. Would I be a strong enough person to find an acceptable compromise and go tripping and also fulfill my obligations to society or would I be a burden on it?
Most people I knew who used LSD or mescaline got tired of that experience after awhile. Do you really want an intense buzz for 12 hrs or so? Also, some people just can't handle that experience. It's not like you can just quit after you drop acid, you have to ride it out. You are better off with your existing dream state if you ask me.
 
Kind of off topic
I've kind of alluded to this elsewhere as far as my own life. While I do not take hallucogens, I do quite often have a very active and at times lucid but nearly always vivid dream life, and faithfully record then for going on five years now. I very much look forward to going to bed at night and while this hasn't altered my worldly pov as far as what I need to do and my responsibilities to myself and others I have found myself many, many times thinking how unfortunate it was that I couldn't keep dreaming. That's without any hallucinogens. I have to wonder what my feelings would be if I did make that jump. Would I be a strong enough person to find an acceptable compromise and go tripping and also fulfill my obligations to society or would I be a burden on it?

Go on ... try it, everyone else is doing it ... you know you want to ... first one is free.

;-)

People can use anything to escape - exercise and meditation, etc etc ... your dream life is rich and fulfilling - are hallucinogens just a curiosity, or do you think they would bring something not already present in your (rich and fulfilling) dream life?
 
Back
Top