Program Notes
Guest speakers: Terence McKenna, Ralph Abraham, and Rupert Sheldrake
(Minutes : Seconds into program)
04:52 Rupert Sheldrake begins a discussion about light.
10:55 Rupert
“What kind of influence could be moving outward through the eyes as part of the image-forming perceptive process, and in this outward projection in some sense project the image we see, the image we see is part of this outward flux.”
14:17 Terence McKenna begins his commentary on Rupert’s ideas about light, expanding them into the realm of imagination.
21:08 Ralph Abraham challenges Terence and Rupert on some of their points.
Previous Episode
066 - Chaos and Imagination (Part 2)
Next Episode
068 - Light and Vision (Part 2)
Similar Episodes
- 068 - Light and Vision (Part 2) - score: 0.87073
- 094 - Morphogenic Family Fields (Part 2) - score: 0.75323
- 532 - The Mind, Consciousness, and the Brain - score: 0.72454
- 061 - Creativity and Imagination (Part 2) - score: 0.68715
- 029 - In the Valley of Novelty (Part 3) - score: 0.66538
- 002 - Linear Societies and Nonlinear Drugs - score: 0.66410
- 434 - The Metaphysics of the Psychedelic Experience - score: 0.66112
- 126 - Psychedelics and the Computer Revolution - score: 0.66094
- 353 - Inflationary Evolution - score: 0.65648
- 389 - Gathering Momentum for a Leap - score: 0.64495
Transcript
00:00:00 ►
Greetings from cyberdelic space.
00:00:21 ►
This is Lorenzo, and I’m your host here in the psychedelic salon.
00:00:25 ►
From cyberdelic space, this is Lorenzo, and I’m your host here in the Psychedelic Salon.
00:00:28 ►
And happy winter solstice to all of you out there.
00:00:37 ►
Or as Steve from South Africa pointed out, it may be the summer solstice for those of you in the southern hemisphere of this lovely little planet.
00:00:44 ►
Just six more of these solstice celebrations before 2012 gets here.
00:00:45 ►
And what are you going to be doing on the December solstice of 2012?
00:00:49 ►
More importantly, what do you think you’ll be doing on the solstice in 2013 and beyond?
00:00:55 ►
Well, that’s just too far ahead for me to be thinking right now,
00:00:58 ►
because if I don’t focus on the here and now,
00:01:01 ►
we aren’t going to get to the next tape in the Trilog series.
00:01:05 ►
You might remember that in the last program, I mentioned the fact that these conversations build on one another,
00:01:12 ►
and that if you haven’t heard the preceding part of a Trilog, you might not understand all of the references being made.
00:01:19 ►
So, with that thought in mind, I want to play a brief little soundbite of Terrence McKenna from the previous podcast.
00:01:43 ►
a part of the will of the world soul than recapturing that Greek sense of fate
00:01:50 ►
that has been replaced in our minds
00:01:54 ►
by this Faustian sense
00:01:56 ►
that is an illusion of control and dominance.
00:02:01 ►
And now, to do my part
00:02:04 ►
in shattering the illusion of control and dominance,
00:02:07 ►
I’m going to do what I can to inject a little more chaos into the psychedelic salon.
00:02:13 ►
Unintentionally, I might add.
00:02:16 ►
As you know, for four weeks or so now, I’ve been putting out three podcasts a week,
00:02:21 ►
two of them being part of the Trilog series with Terrence McKenna,
00:02:25 ►
Ralph Abraham, and Rupert Sheldrake, and the other program each week coming from other
00:02:30 ►
sources.
00:02:31 ►
The program I started to put together for today was to have included two of this year’s
00:02:36 ►
Burning Man talks, one by Mark Pesce and the other by Amanda Fielding.
00:02:41 ►
And while the talks are ready to go, I haven’t yet received an okay from Amanda, so
00:02:45 ►
I decided to skip that program for now and get the next Trilog tape out. Now, if you heard my
00:02:52 ►
last podcast, you might want to remember me saying that the title of the next tape in the Trilog
00:02:58 ►
series is The World, Soul, and the Mushroom. I think you’ll probably be able to imagine my disappointment in not finding that tape,
00:03:08 ►
because my disappointment is probably on the same order as your disappointment might be right now,
00:03:13 ►
as it slowly dawns on you that this long introduction is my way of saying I screwed up.
00:03:20 ►
Apparently, when I was digitizing all of these tapes, the mushroom tape came up during one
00:03:26 ►
of the all-night sessions when I was getting up every 90 minutes or so to change tapes.
00:03:32 ►
And guess what?
00:03:33 ►
I apparently recorded the third tape in the series twice, but I labeled the second copy
00:03:39 ►
as tape 4.
00:03:41 ►
So I’m afraid that the mysterious mushroom tape is going to have to wait until I can mount another expedition to Santa Cruz
00:03:48 ►
where I can borrow it again from Ralph Abraham and get it into MP3 format for a podcast.
00:03:55 ►
So I’ve decided to mask my disappointment at not being able to hear the trialogue about the world, soul, and the mushroom
00:04:02 ►
by being thankful for this wonderful
00:04:05 ►
solstice gift from the goddess of chaos. I’m sure that she’s held back the mushroom tape from us
00:04:12 ►
until the end of the trialogue series when we’ll be better prepared to grok its wisdom.
00:04:18 ►
So how’s that for putting a pretty face on my screw-up, huh? Anyway, let’s get on with today’s program, which is from the fifth
00:04:27 ►
tape in a series of ten that were made in the Septembers of 1989 and 1990 at Esalen, where
00:04:36 ►
Terrence McKenna, Ralph Abraham, and Rupert Sheldrake got together and held a trialogue on
00:04:41 ►
the topic of light and vision. And we begin with Rupert
00:04:46 ►
Sheldrake setting out a few of his thoughts about light.
00:04:53 ►
I’ve been thinking a lot about light. One of the problems that I’ve been thinking about
00:05:00 ►
is the connection between physical light, the kind we study in physics,
00:05:06 ►
and light used in a whole host of other senses, like the light of consciousness, the light
00:05:11 ►
of reason, the light of understanding, or the light of God. And it seems to me that
00:05:20 ►
if these two kinds of light, it’s not that one’s physical and the other’s just kind of metaphorical,
00:05:26 ►
but that in some sense they must be aspects of each other.
00:05:30 ►
They must be talking about the same thing, of which we’re seeing different aspects.
00:05:35 ►
So this suggests there’s some relationship between light and understanding, or light and vision.
00:05:42 ►
And then, of course, we realize there is a connection between light and vision.
00:05:45 ►
Light is the medium of vision.
00:05:46 ►
Vision not just in the visionary sense,
00:05:48 ►
but in the sense of ordinary visual perception.
00:05:54 ►
So then, if one thinks about ordinary visual perception
00:05:57 ►
and thinks, well, how much do we understand
00:05:59 ►
about the nature of vision?
00:06:00 ►
What is vision?
00:06:02 ►
What is seeing of which light is the medium? Then we find
00:06:08 ►
that science doesn’t really tell us very much. What it tells us is that light
00:06:12 ►
moves from the thing we see, goes through the eye, inverted image on the retina,
00:06:16 ►
patterns of electrical and chemical activity in the optic ganglia and nerves
00:06:21 ►
and in the cerebral cortex. And then somehow what we’re seeing seems to spring up in a totally unexplained way
00:06:31 ►
as in a subjective image of what we see somewhere inside the brain.
00:06:36 ►
And we then falsely imagine, according to the standard theory,
00:06:39 ►
that this image inside the brain, subjectively experienced we know not how, is then projected outwards until it appears to be in the place where the thing seen is.
00:06:52 ►
So if I’m looking at you Terence, the light rays come into my eye and then I
00:06:58 ►
have a subjective image of you which is actually just my understanding or my
00:07:02 ►
subjective awareness of an electrochemical pattern in my optical cortex. That gives me somewhere in the brain a subjective image
00:07:10 ►
of you, which I experience subjectively and imagine is where you are, but actually it’s
00:07:15 ►
inside the brain. That’s the standard theory. And it seems to me an extremely peculiar theory
00:07:21 ►
of vision, because it has a one-way movement of light into the body. It has things going on inside the brain. And then the visual world we experience is imagined to be
00:07:30 ►
located inside the brain and not around us where it seems to be. So what I’ve been considering is
00:07:37 ►
the idea that when the light comes in, the visual image is a mental image. It’s definitely a mental and subjective
00:07:46 ►
image. My image of you is interpreted by me. It’s a mental construct. But I think this
00:07:51 ►
mental construct may not be inside the brain, but right where you are, namely outside me.
00:07:58 ►
And this is an idea which is developed with great clarity by Bergson, who gives in Matter and Memory, who gives the notion that
00:08:06 ►
what we see, our perceptual world, is all around us. And the idea that it’s inside the
00:08:14 ►
brain corresponds not at all with our actual experience. It’s just a theory. It’s a theory
00:08:19 ►
of remarkable hallucinatory power, because we forget it’s a theory quite quickly.
00:08:26 ►
Anyway, so if there’s an outward projection of images, as well as an inward movement of light in the process of vision,
00:08:34 ►
then if this outward projection has anything to it, if I’m not just playing with words, producing a different metaphor,
00:08:41 ►
there must be something moving out, some influence moving out, as
00:08:45 ►
well as the light moving in. And if so, people or things might be affected just by being
00:08:51 ►
looked at, if some influence is going out from the eyes as well as an influence coming
00:08:55 ►
in. Now, at this stage, we recognize that the idea that things go out from the eyes
00:09:02 ►
as well as come in is a very old and traditional view of vision.
00:09:05 ►
It was present among the pre-Socratics.
00:09:07 ►
It’s present in an implicit form all over the world
00:09:10 ►
in the fear and practices associated with the evil eye,
00:09:13 ►
which is supposed to be the outward movement of influences
00:09:15 ►
from the eye to the thing or person looked at.
00:09:19 ►
And we find there’s also an enormous folklore in our own culture,
00:09:23 ►
known to everybody,
00:09:24 ►
about the phenomenon
00:09:26 ►
of the sense of being stared at the feeling that people have when they think
00:09:30 ►
they’re being looked at for example from behind and turn around and indeed
00:09:33 ►
someone’s looking at them there seems to be an influence of the eyes that is
00:09:37 ►
actually detected by people and 95% of a normal population in England according
00:09:43 ►
to a recent survey have actually directly experienced this.
00:09:46 ►
It’s very common.
00:09:48 ►
Now, there’s not been much empirical research on the sense of being stared at.
00:09:51 ►
Three published papers in 100 years.
00:09:54 ►
And it’s a subject that parapsychologists have ignored, as well as psychologists.
00:09:59 ►
And it’s, I think, oddly enough, the biggest blind spot in our whole view of the world,
00:10:04 ►
because I think it holds the key to moving to an entirely new paradigm,
00:10:08 ►
an entirely new understanding of the relation between mind and matter
00:10:14 ►
or spirit and body.
00:10:19 ►
I’ve been doing experiments to test for the sense of being stared at.
00:10:23 ►
Most people aren’t very good at it
00:10:25 ►
under sort of initial conditions. The only way is to do long series of experiments where people
00:10:29 ►
train the ability to do it under the artificial condition of experiments. But let’s assume for
00:10:34 ►
the purpose of discussion that it can be established empirically that there is such a thing as the
00:10:38 ►
sense of being stared at. I mean, that’s an empirically investigatable point assuming that there is some influence passing out of the eyes
00:10:46 ►
which can be detected empirically
00:10:49 ►
in the sense of being stared at
00:10:51 ►
then what kind of influence could this possibly be
00:10:55 ►
what kind of influence could be moving outwards through the eyes
00:10:59 ►
as part of the image forming
00:11:01 ►
perceptive process
00:11:03 ►
and this outward projection, in some sense,
00:11:08 ►
projects the image we see,
00:11:10 ►
or the image we see is part of this outward flux,
00:11:13 ►
or this movement outwards,
00:11:17 ►
the opposite direction to the incoming light.
00:11:20 ►
Now, there’s two possibilities
00:11:22 ►
for explaining such an outward movement.
00:11:24 ►
One of them is such an outward movement. One
00:11:25 ►
of them is that this outward movement is in a kind of mental field, let’s say,
00:11:31 ►
which I think of as a morphic field, which is somehow over and above the
00:11:35 ►
electromagnetic field and has nothing much to do with it except for the fact
00:11:39 ►
the electromagnetic field sets up all the normally understood electrochemical
00:11:44 ►
changes in the brain and then somehow an organizing or morphic field organizes and meshes in
00:11:49 ►
and relates to that field but is not itself part of it and then projects out
00:11:53 ►
the image. That’s one possibility. The other possibility, a more economical one,
00:11:59 ►
is that the outward projection process takes place by a reverse movement along the photons of
00:12:05 ►
light which are coming in. In other words, that when the photon comes in it
00:12:10 ►
corresponds to an antiparticle moving out, a kind of opposite of a photon
00:12:15 ►
moving out, and that these outward moving influences that move along the exact
00:12:21 ►
track of the photons are associated with
00:12:25 ►
vision, perception, comprehension, subjective experience of an object. That
00:12:31 ►
they’re, as it were, the grokking, the grok wave if you like, or the outward
00:12:36 ►
moving. Somehow this vision is born on the reverse movement of photons. Since, physically speaking, from the point of view of a photon,
00:12:50 ►
no time elapses as it travels,
00:12:52 ►
the connection between the source from which it leaves,
00:12:55 ►
the reflection from my skin,
00:12:57 ►
and the place where it arrives, namely a rod or a cone cell in your retina,
00:13:07 ►
there’s no time taken, and therefore the contact is,
00:13:09 ►
from the point of view of the photon, instantaneous
00:13:11 ►
between the source and the sink.
00:13:13 ►
But an instantaneous connection, if there were a reverse flow of action,
00:13:18 ►
could mean that there’d be this kind of instantaneous grokking, as it were,
00:13:21 ►
and that the two would be connected together.
00:13:25 ►
And one is the subject, the other is the object, as it were.
00:13:28 ►
But through this connection together, there’s this reverse flow between them.
00:13:34 ►
And so vision may be very closely related to light.
00:13:38 ►
Vision may, it would be too crude to say that the antiparticle of the photon is the vision.
00:13:44 ►
It would be too crude to say that the antiparticle of the photon is the vision.
00:13:53 ►
But there may be the missing link here between vision and light.
00:13:57 ►
It may simply be that the photon is in some sense reversible and that the electromagnetic field is in some sense the field of vision as well.
00:14:05 ►
So that was one of the lines I’ve been thinking about,
00:14:08 ►
because it has further implications.
00:14:11 ►
So I just wanted to see what you thought about it.
00:14:15 ►
Well, there are a number of questions to be asked here.
00:14:20 ►
I noticed you were careful to say that the Vizion was not simply the antiparticle
00:14:29 ►
of the photon, and I imagine this was because you anticipated the objection that if it were
00:14:36 ►
simply the antiparticle of the photon, then the phenomenon of light pressure should not exist and it is in fact does exist and
00:14:47 ►
is well studied because the vision would cancel out the impelling force of the
00:14:54 ►
forward-moving photon and so solar sails and things like that would not work or
00:15:03 ►
could be polarized this is no problem at all.
00:15:07 ►
We can allow that the photon is a particle
00:15:10 ►
with physical properties in the physical realm
00:15:12 ►
and therefore exerts a physical pressure.
00:15:15 ►
Now, if the vision is in some sense
00:15:18 ►
to do with the conscious properties
00:15:20 ►
or let’s say properties of understanding,
00:15:24 ►
that’s moving in the opposite direction,
00:15:26 ►
setting up a wave in the opposite direction.
00:15:28 ►
And the sense of being stared at, for example,
00:15:30 ►
would be sensing that wave impinging it.
00:15:32 ►
Right.
00:15:33 ►
As it were, there’d be a kind of pressure
00:15:34 ►
in that direction of the psychic kind.
00:15:36 ►
Well, I think then a more elegant description
00:15:38 ►
of what you’re trying to say
00:15:40 ►
is not to call the vision a particle
00:15:44 ►
which accompanies the photon, but to call this reverse
00:15:48 ►
wave phenomenon a quality of the photon itself. As you point out, from the point of view of
00:15:55 ►
the photon, the travel time to and from to origin is zero. So why not simply
00:16:08 ►
take a page from super string theory and visualize the photon as a kind of particle which is
00:16:18 ►
stretched in one dimension and is both co-present at its origin and its destination simultaneously
00:16:26 ►
and thus able to impart information at a distance by that means.
00:16:34 ►
You see, if you don’t do that, if you say that the Vizion accompanies the photon but
00:16:39 ►
is not an antiphoton, then you’ve violated a major symmetry in the edifice of physics,
00:16:46 ►
because the question can then be asked, well, what about every other particle? Does
00:16:52 ►
it have a ghost particle which is not its simple antiparticle, but which
00:16:57 ►
partakes of some of its properties but not others? And I think you’d unleash a
00:17:03 ►
lot of messy speculation at that point.
00:17:07 ►
So I prefer a more complex photon.
00:17:08 ►
It might not be so messy, you see,
00:17:11 ►
because the antiparticles of most other particles are antimatter,
00:17:15 ►
and antimatter in some sense doesn’t exist.
00:17:21 ►
Well, in what sense?
00:17:24 ►
Well, first of all, that the universe is not symmetrical.
00:17:27 ►
If the universe had mostly its same amount of matter and antimatter,
00:17:30 ►
they would self-annihilate and we wouldn’t be here.
00:17:33 ►
We’re only here because there was an enormous change in symmetry
00:17:37 ►
between matter and antimatter,
00:17:39 ►
so that matter is predominant in our universe, for a start.
00:17:43 ►
At least in this part of the universe. Yes, all right. But least in this part of the universe. At least in this part of the universe, yes, all right.
00:17:46 ►
But then in this part of the universe, you see,
00:17:48 ►
there’s a tremendous asymmetry between the two,
00:17:50 ►
and antimatter has a symmetrical relationship to matter
00:17:53 ►
in our mathematical imaginations,
00:17:55 ►
but it doesn’t in physical reality.
00:17:58 ►
As we know it.
00:17:59 ►
As we know it.
00:18:00 ►
That’s true.
00:18:01 ►
So I would have thought that to follow this,
00:18:04 ►
if one did want to see, you
00:18:05 ►
see I’m not so wedded to the particle theories of, let’s say that light moving in one direction
00:18:10 ►
which already has pattern quality etc is associated with vision moving in the other, to put it in the
00:18:16 ►
most general terms. We needn’t bring in the photons necessarily but we see still that the
00:18:22 ►
thing that moves in the other direction is in some senses its opposite, but in other senses is different,
00:18:27 ►
because it doesn’t have as physical a reality as the light does.
00:18:32 ►
And that’s exactly the same is true of the antimatter,
00:18:34 ►
which is supposed, by symmetry considerations,
00:18:37 ►
to be, at least originally, equal and opposite to matter.
00:18:43 ►
Yes, I see what you’re saying.
00:18:45 ►
Ralph, how do you take to this? equal and opposite to matter. Yes, I see what you’re saying.
00:18:48 ►
Ralph, how do you take to this? This discussion is very hypothetical.
00:18:51 ►
In fact, as hypotheses go, this is the big bag full.
00:18:57 ►
Certainly if
00:19:00 ►
if there was no… if there was established that there was no effect could be produced in a person by looking at them from behind and so on,
00:19:08 ►
then this discussion is less interesting,
00:19:11 ►
although there still remain some serious outstanding questions about the M-fields, about morphogenesis.
00:19:17 ►
The relation of mind and matter, the nature of vision and light.
00:19:21 ►
These still remain questions.
00:19:23 ►
They still remain questions.
00:19:21 ►
nature of vision and light.
00:19:23 ►
These still remain questions.
00:19:24 ►
They still remain questions.
00:19:29 ►
Nevertheless, it does seem very useful and correct to make this assumption that such effect had been established.
00:19:33 ►
But this assumption then puts us at some time in the future
00:19:37 ►
supposing that some time in the past and so on.
00:19:40 ►
In that case, the science that we’d be using
00:19:44 ►
to carry on this discussion
00:19:47 ►
would be a different one than we’ve got now,
00:19:49 ►
and that’s a further speculation that we’re making.
00:19:53 ►
For example, if such a thing were established,
00:19:56 ►
then that would be the first of all the various so-called paranormal phenomenon
00:20:00 ►
of recent decades in science to be validated and accepted.
00:20:06 ►
Exactly. That’s why I think it’s so important.
00:20:08 ►
Me too. But probably that means that a lot of paradigms would be shifted,
00:20:13 ►
and therefore we would also be seeking explanation of telepathy
00:20:17 ►
and other kinds of things that have to do with vision and distance,
00:20:21 ►
remote seeing, clairvoyance.
00:20:23 ►
Second sight.
00:20:24 ►
Yes, I don’t think it would automatically follow
00:20:27 ►
if this effect were established
00:20:29 ►
that people would think it had anything to do with eyes or light at all.
00:20:34 ►
But the mind.
00:20:35 ►
Yes, you’ve established that attention can be felt across space.
00:20:41 ►
This is an establishment of telepathy.
00:20:44 ►
It isn’t the fact that I’m looking at the back of
00:20:46 ►
their head. It’s that I’m focusing my attention. And you know, it’s most effective when you really
00:20:52 ►
bore in. Well, the output of the optical system is not increasing. Output of the mental
00:21:00 ►
act of concentration is what is increasing. I just wanted to get to the end of this sentence.
00:21:05 ►
Go for it.
00:21:07 ►
If we agree, then, in the implication of this hypothesis
00:21:13 ►
that science has been stood on its head, as it were,
00:21:17 ►
by the discovery of one paranormal thing,
00:21:19 ►
so all of them are fair game,
00:21:20 ►
we have to assume that field theory and so on
00:21:22 ►
would have expanded considerably
00:21:24 ►
so that
00:21:25 ►
various proposed
00:21:28 ►
mathematical models for the M field and so
00:21:30 ►
on would abound.
00:21:32 ►
And therefore, when we
00:21:34 ►
come to the
00:21:35 ►
your argument in favor
00:21:38 ►
of model two over model one on
00:21:40 ►
grounds of economy, I don’t think that would be
00:21:42 ►
effective. So therefore,
00:21:44 ►
I’m posing this question to think about why isn’t model one actually more
00:21:49 ►
interesting where we would think of the return influence from the from the
00:21:57 ►
receiver to the sender to be carried in possibly a different field for which any model would be fair game.
00:22:07 ►
I don’t really see the sense
00:22:11 ►
of identifying the…
00:22:15 ►
Let’s say we have an experimental result
00:22:17 ►
that in laboratory people can get someone’s attention
00:22:21 ►
from behind by looking, by boring,
00:22:23 ►
as Terence says,
00:22:25 ►
would it really be useful to propose the electromagnetic field
00:22:32 ►
as in any way an intermediary for that influence?
00:22:35 ►
Or would we rather just have another field
00:22:38 ►
that would be a conceptual model for the observed phenomenon,
00:22:43 ►
including its variation of force with distance and
00:22:46 ►
so on, trying to measure the speed
00:22:48 ►
of light as it were, if it were measurable
00:22:50 ►
within that field and see if there was any
00:22:52 ►
comparison and so on
00:22:53 ►
Yes, yes, well I think that this question
00:22:56 ►
is actually empirically testable
00:22:58 ►
and I’ll tell you how
00:22:59 ►
it’s just occurred to me that
00:23:02 ►
one of the ways I thought of testing for the sense
00:23:04 ►
of being stared at
00:23:05 ►
is first train people to get sensitive subjects, you know, so people can do it fairly reliably.
00:23:11 ►
Then try the effect of distance, staring through binoculars and so forth.
00:23:15 ►
Then doing it over closed-circuit TV, different rooms of the same house.
00:23:20 ►
Can they tell when they’re being looked at through the TV?
00:23:26 ►
the same huss can they tell when they’re being looked at through the tv and if that works real tv you know people can do people when they’re seen live on the air by millions of people feel any
00:23:31 ►
different from people being with a blank camera at them where nobody’s looking at them is there
00:23:36 ►
any different broadcasters say they can tell a big difference when it’s live and maybe it’s just
00:23:41 ►
imagination but um just imagination but whatever whatever the reason for it is
00:23:46 ►
if one could find that this worked over TV
00:23:49 ►
that people in a studio could tell
00:23:50 ►
when people thousands of miles away
00:23:52 ►
were looking at them, you know, satellite
00:23:54 ►
and stuff, if it were going
00:23:56 ►
through a reverse circuit
00:23:58 ►
it would then have to go through electrons
00:24:00 ►
through the TV screen, back through the wires
00:24:02 ►
of the TV set, out through the aerial
00:24:04 ►
then through the electromagnetic screen, back through the wires of the TV set, out through the aerial, then through the electromagnetic field,
00:24:08 ►
and then back through other electronic apparatus
00:24:10 ►
to sort of vibrations of things inside video cameras.
00:24:17 ►
So I think that would be rather…
00:24:19 ►
The field hypothesis in that case would be more economical.
00:24:24 ►
But then one could test out the rate of movement of that field,
00:24:30 ►
because if one could insert a time delay into the TV transmission, for example,
00:24:35 ►
two minutes or something,
00:24:37 ►
and then ask the person to say when they felt the thing hit them.
00:24:43 ►
It would be a very crude measure, this,
00:24:44 ►
but it could tell one whether it was moving at the speed of light or at least
00:24:50 ►
anything roughly like that, or whether it took much longer or what.
00:24:53 ►
I think the stack of hierarchical hypotheses here is sufficiently thick to call this more
00:25:02 ►
or less fiction. Let’s take an audience survey. Terence, do you think that it this more or less fiction. And let’s take an audience survey.
00:25:06 ►
Terence, do you think that it’s more or less economical
00:25:10 ►
to assume that this kind of influence is carried in
00:25:14 ►
a new or more or less fictitious M field
00:25:17 ►
devoted to inventing to model this phenomenon alone
00:25:20 ►
or to try to cram it into the electrical wire?
00:25:24 ►
I think I’d have to go for a new field.
00:25:28 ►
Me too.
00:25:28 ►
And furthermore, the idea of identifying this field
00:25:32 ►
while thinking of this phenomenon as mental.
00:25:35 ►
I mean, this, I think we’re, here’s the bottom line.
00:25:40 ►
Since ancient times, we have thought of the mental,
00:25:44 ►
physical, and spiritual phenomenon as operating in different planes.
00:25:49 ►
And I think that these planes used metaphorically by the ancients and the rishis of India and all the other mystical cultures
00:25:59 ►
are more or less what we’re calling fields.
00:26:03 ►
And so they have found it useful to separate these fields.
00:26:06 ►
So if we get a physical perception,
00:26:10 ►
whatever that word means, I’m not sure,
00:26:12 ►
the same as reception,
00:26:14 ►
we get, anyway, some photons,
00:26:17 ►
and then we get a mental picture,
00:26:18 ►
or we get a brain picture,
00:26:20 ►
we get a visual cortex picture,
00:26:21 ►
and then somehow this is, by resonance,
00:26:23 ►
becomes a mental picture in the mind and so on.
00:26:27 ►
Then that has suggested a resonance between these two planes,
00:26:31 ►
an object, as it were, in the physical, and an object, as it were, in the mental.
00:26:35 ►
Now, the electromagnetic field is physical, at least I think of it as physical,
00:26:39 ►
although physicists might think of several parallel planes
00:26:43 ►
where there are different fields operating,
00:26:45 ►
like the strong force and the weak force
00:26:47 ►
and so on, the gravitational field.
00:26:49 ►
But thinking of all of that collectively as the physical field.
00:26:54 ►
And I like, this is prejudiced,
00:26:57 ►
I like the idea of the separate mental field.
00:27:00 ►
I like the idea that you had mentioned before,
00:27:04 ►
the mind somehow follows the eye out
00:27:07 ►
and extends itself so as to actually engulf the object,
00:27:12 ►
so as it were to know it through an intimate touch
00:27:16 ►
that cognition could be a kind of engulfing,
00:27:20 ►
like Paramecium eats the food.
00:27:23 ►
That this motion then is visualized in the mental plane
00:27:28 ►
and therefore belongs to a different field.
00:27:31 ►
Now, we’re not inquiring as to the actual structure,
00:27:35 ►
the true structure of the phenomenal mental and spiritual universe,
00:27:39 ►
only what kind of models are useful to us.
00:27:43 ►
And economy is not the only consideration.
00:27:46 ►
So coming from a deep habit,
00:27:48 ►
an old runnel of thought
00:27:51 ►
where the mental and physical
00:27:52 ►
being separate fields,
00:27:54 ►
I guess I’m feeling a bias
00:27:56 ►
toward that view.
00:28:00 ►
On the other hand,
00:28:01 ►
if you could show that this telepathy or whatever it is, the transmission of an influence from one person to another could be modulated electromagnetically by holding a magnet near that would strengthen the idea of the association, the actual proximity of the two separate planes,
00:28:28 ►
without even then suggesting to identify them.
00:28:33 ►
Yes, well, I mean, there’s a part of me, see,
00:28:36 ►
that thinks the separate field idea is more attractive.
00:28:40 ►
But I’ve been leaning over backwards
00:28:42 ►
to try and see whether,
00:28:44 ►
instead of introducing separate fields
00:28:46 ►
one can come to a new understanding
00:28:49 ►
of the electromagnetic field
00:28:51 ►
and that the connection
00:28:54 ►
between vision and light
00:28:55 ►
may be a very very close one
00:28:59 ►
and so that even if there is
00:29:00 ►
this other field involved
00:29:01 ►
which moves out and engulfs it
00:29:03 ►
this other field may be
00:29:04 ►
in intimate resonance with the electromagnetic field,
00:29:08 ►
as it may be in the brain.
00:29:09 ►
I mean, there’s no doubt that the changes in the nerves are largely electromagnetic patterns.
00:29:14 ►
And there’s scope for resonance there.
00:29:17 ►
But the light that’s coming to our eyes is a complex…
00:29:20 ►
The fact I can see you, all that complexity is in the light that’s coming to my eyes.
00:29:24 ►
And if this thing is resonating with the whole field of vibration,
00:29:28 ►
then indeed it will connect me through the light,
00:29:31 ►
because the field of vibration is between us,
00:29:33 ►
and it comes from you and it comes to me.
00:29:37 ►
So anything that resonated with the light that’s in between us
00:29:41 ►
would indeed directly connect us, as it were, via the light.
00:29:44 ►
that’s in between us would indeed directly connect us as it were via the light.
00:29:50 ►
Well I have trouble with this particle view.
00:29:52 ►
I’m more comfortable with the wave metaphor and since experts assure us that they’re more or less equivalent
00:29:55 ►
let’s just think of waves.
00:29:57 ►
Here I am looking at these waves on the ocean
00:30:00 ►
and I see that there’s a rock out there
00:30:03 ►
and as the waves pass the rock
00:30:05 ►
they uh their shape is is is changed and somehow there is a hologram of the rock is then is the
00:30:13 ►
wave that comes forward it crashes on the beach and then there’s a reflected wave that goes back
00:30:19 ►
and i think that the electromagnetic field as theoretical physicists or something view it anyway
00:30:26 ►
is something very like that.
00:30:29 ►
It has a mathematical model
00:30:30 ►
which is a wave equation
00:30:31 ►
and the speed of light in the waves
00:30:33 ►
and you see the ripples going along and so on.
00:30:37 ►
And this does seem a suitable medium
00:30:42 ►
for influence to go both ways.
00:30:46 ►
But somehow I don’t see it as having a rich enough structure
00:30:49 ►
to model all of mental processes.
00:30:55 ►
I’m not suggesting all mental processes.
00:30:56 ►
I’m only modelling vision on this so far.
00:30:59 ►
Yes, so to see that the visual part of the mental field
00:31:04 ►
as part of the M field, the mind,
00:31:10 ►
the visual part is maybe just a very thin slice
00:31:13 ►
which is somehow in very intimate contact
00:31:16 ►
and close resonance with the electromagnetic field.
00:31:19 ►
That must be right.
00:31:21 ►
But to identify them for sending influences around between people,
00:31:26 ►
I think, is very limiting.
00:31:29 ►
But it would be somehow better to carry on the conversation
00:31:35 ►
about the model of the phenomenon
00:31:37 ►
after seeing the phenomenon,
00:31:38 ►
the result of actually these experiments with the video and so on.
00:31:43 ►
Well, yes, except that one doesn know, one doesn’t have to wait
00:31:46 ►
for empirical results to discuss the possibilities. And the reason why it’s not worth, why I think
00:31:51 ►
it’s a bad strategy to wait for empirical data is that if one thinks through this phenomenon,
00:31:56 ►
if one thinks it through, one can derive perhaps other experiments which are simpler and easier to do and which might even correspond to existing
00:32:06 ►
data.
00:32:07 ►
I would like to ask a question of this.
00:32:11 ►
It’s the…
00:32:12 ►
Terence said…
00:32:13 ►
What was it you said about…
00:32:17 ►
This is your definition of progress.
00:32:19 ►
Things progress toward a higher level of integration.
00:32:23 ►
So the urgent desire of Einstein and other physicists
00:32:26 ►
for a unified field theory
00:32:28 ►
is an expression of this universal urge for progress.
00:32:32 ►
And here we have Rupert, I think,
00:32:34 ►
lusting after this unification
00:32:36 ►
that I think is a really…
00:32:37 ►
Maybe this is a really good idea,
00:32:39 ►
if we can put it this way,
00:32:41 ►
that the electromagnetic field
00:32:43 ►
is to be thought of as an integral part
00:32:47 ►
of the enfield of the mind, of the soul of the world, that it just belongs in there,
00:32:53 ►
more in the mental part of the picture than the physical.
00:32:57 ►
Well, I think surely if we do have the idea of interfacing planes, if you were trying
00:33:03 ►
to take your metaphor of the levels, the old
00:33:05 ►
idea of different levels, with the planes being thought of as fields, in the physical
00:33:10 ►
universe we do actually have a series of stratified levels. We’ve got the quantum matter fields,
00:33:16 ►
which are to do with the strong and the weak nuclear forces in atoms. And the quantum matter
00:33:21 ►
fields are supposed to determine the shape, structure, properties of atoms and molecules.
00:33:27 ►
But once you get about, I mean, they only work over very short ranges.
00:33:31 ►
The electromagnetic field is what actually holds together
00:33:34 ►
atoms and molecules and crystals more than anything else.
00:33:39 ►
And the electromagnetic field becomes the kind of higher organizing field
00:33:43 ►
of more complex structures.
00:33:44 ►
And the electromagnetic field becomes the kind of higher organizing field of more complex structures.
00:33:52 ►
So one could say the electromagnetic field is associated with or the medium of the morphic fields,
00:33:53 ►
if you like, of molecules and crystals.
00:34:01 ►
And then when you get to plants and vegetative growth, there’s a morphic field of vegetative growth which interfaces with the electromagnetic field somehow
00:34:06 ►
as the lower level field.
00:34:08 ►
It sort of intervibrates with it.
00:34:10 ►
And then that can be included in animals
00:34:12 ►
within what Aristotle called the animal soul,
00:34:15 ►
which is the organizing principle of instincts and movements,
00:34:17 ►
which organizes and coordinates the activities of the nervous system.
00:34:21 ►
And then you can have hierarchically higher planes above that,
00:34:25 ►
more embracing fields, perceptual fields,
00:34:27 ►
fields of sort of higher level understanding, etc.,
00:34:30 ►
which work down…
00:34:31 ►
So you have this plane of fields which are like the planes,
00:34:36 ►
but they’re in a nested hierarchy.
00:34:38 ►
And then the gravitational field embraces all as the universal field.
00:34:43 ►
I got it.
00:34:44 ►
The Novum Organum.
00:34:46 ►
The new order of the universe,
00:34:49 ►
in which there’s more fields.
00:34:52 ►
Well, the electromagnetic field
00:34:55 ►
as a constituent component of the end field,
00:34:58 ►
the mind field, or the world’s soul,
00:35:01 ►
should be utilized economically
00:35:04 ►
to carry as much of the burden of
00:35:05 ►
explanation as
00:35:06 ►
possible.
00:35:07 ►
And certainly all of
00:35:08 ►
these morphogenetic
00:35:09 ►
phenomena about
00:35:10 ►
crystals and so on
00:35:11 ►
are so intimately
00:35:12 ►
connected by resonance
00:35:15 ►
with an
00:35:15 ►
electromagnetic field
00:35:16 ►
that the EM field
00:35:17 ►
itself might be
00:35:18 ►
enough to explain
00:35:19 ►
this evolution of
00:35:20 ►
structure.
00:35:21 ►
I think it’s time to
00:35:22 ►
bring up dowsing.
00:35:25 ►
Well, you mentioned evidence for this sort of thing,
00:35:31 ►
which has been ignored.
00:35:32 ►
I mean, dowsing passed through my mind.
00:35:36 ►
Pheromones is another possibility here.
00:35:40 ►
There are not only electromagnetic fields,
00:35:43 ►
but there are not only electromagnetic fields, but there are chemical fields.
00:35:45 ►
And I think that pheromones are vastly underrated
00:35:49 ►
for their organizing power in biology and social systems.
00:35:54 ►
And that, in fact, the whole earth may be essentially chemically regulated
00:35:59 ►
through very small molecule organic compounds
00:36:05 ►
that are a byproduct of the metabolism of various species,
00:36:12 ►
but which percolate out through the environment
00:36:15 ►
and set up the field, the ambiance,
00:36:20 ►
in which a lot of animal and plant business is done.
00:36:24 ►
I mean, to me, the vegetative mind and all this,
00:36:27 ►
there have to be mechanisms for all this influence,
00:36:31 ►
and I think probably easily volatilized,
00:36:35 ►
low molecular weight compounds are running a lot of this.
00:36:41 ►
It’s even conceivable that Rupert’s experiments
00:36:44 ►
on looking at the back
00:36:46 ►
of people’s heads
00:36:47 ►
would show that it worked
00:36:49 ►
in a room of this size,
00:36:51 ►
but that the television
00:36:53 ►
transmissions would fail.
00:36:56 ►
And that would argue to me
00:36:57 ►
that it was, in fact,
00:36:58 ►
pheromonal.
00:37:00 ►
I mean, if materialists
00:37:03 ►
can seriously argue
00:37:04 ►
that the crystallization phenomenon
00:37:06 ►
has to do with seed crystals moving around on chemists’ beards,
00:37:11 ►
then they will certainly be in agreement
00:37:14 ►
that the percolation rates of nature
00:37:17 ►
are effective enough to move these control
00:37:22 ►
and message-bearing chemicals around everywhere.
00:37:25 ►
Well, this idea, I think, is very supportive of Rupert’s economy move
00:37:32 ►
because the olfactory bulb is nothing but a transducer
00:37:36 ►
from the chemical field to the electromagnetic.
00:37:39 ►
For example, in Walter Freeman’s model,
00:37:42 ►
just a small number of molecules of the scent,
00:37:47 ►
the pheromone, is enough to excite the identifiable morphology of the electromagnetic wave across
00:37:55 ►
the bulb, which is then identified by some kind of associative memory living primarily
00:38:00 ►
in the electromagnetic activity of the brain with whatever is the association for that scent.
00:38:08 ►
So there’s a coupling that kind of shows the electromagnetic field
00:38:13 ►
as an intermediary between the chemical field and the mental field.
00:38:18 ►
Which it obviously is, because the chemical field
00:38:22 ►
is simply a higher-order manifestation
00:38:25 ►
of the electromagnetic field,
00:38:28 ►
because most of these volatile compounds
00:38:33 ►
have very electronically active ring structures.
00:38:39 ►
Yes, it’s a resonance phenomenon.
00:38:40 ►
Exactly.
00:38:41 ►
Charge transfer and resonance and all of this stuff is happening. It is the
00:38:46 ►
most electronically active molecules that are the drugs, the pheromones, the
00:38:52 ►
growth regulators and so forth. Yes, so here we’ve got sensors that respond in a
00:39:00 ►
kind of resonant electromagnetic resonance to these things which then
00:39:04 ►
could, by morphic resonance,
00:39:06 ►
bring into play a much larger field of memory and association.
00:39:09 ►
But the interfacing would be electromagnetic again.
00:39:13 ►
And in hearing, you see, if we follow through these lines,
00:39:17 ►
the smell isn’t localized anywhere particularly.
00:39:20 ►
Our vision, when I see you,
00:39:21 ►
you are localized somewhere outside me where you are.
00:39:24 ►
If I hear you, the are localized somewhere outside me where you are.
00:39:28 ►
If I hear you, the sound is also localized outside me.
00:39:32 ►
I don’t hear sounds as if they’re arising inside my auditory cortex.
00:39:36 ►
I hear them as if they’re arising around me in three-dimensional space,
00:39:39 ►
and I can locate, in fact, which direction they’re coming from.
00:39:46 ►
So this means that we must not only be surrounded by a kind of perceptual,
00:39:49 ►
visual perceptual field that spreads out from us and fills the space of our perception right out to the distant stars when we look at them,
00:39:54 ►
but we’re also surrounded by an auditory perceptual field which is again located around us.
00:40:00 ►
And it means therefore that something must move out.
00:40:03 ►
The sun’s come in and something must, as it were, move out from us
00:40:07 ►
in the opposite direction to the sun.
00:40:09 ►
Well, this perhaps militates against the photon argument,
00:40:13 ►
because in this case it would have to be a kind of antiphonon that was moving,
00:40:17 ►
and it would move at the velocity of sun, not the velocity of light,
00:40:20 ►
if it was the kind of shadow side of the sound wave that was used as the medium. And its undetectability is going to be troubling. Well people may be
00:40:30 ►
able to tell when they’re being listened to, and you sometimes doubt it when you
00:40:34 ►
see some people talking, but there’s a simple experiment here. You have
00:40:41 ►
people talking, saying a message down the telephone, and at
00:40:45 ►
the other end, according to some random program, you have somebody listening to what they’re
00:40:49 ►
saying or not listening, and you have to… they have to be able to tell you when they
00:40:53 ►
think they’re being listened to. That’s a simple experiment. It can be done by anybody,
00:40:58 ►
and if it’s done locally, at local call rates, it would be very inexpensive, not requiring
00:41:03 ►
a large grant or anything well with radio too
00:41:07 ►
I just think it won’t work
00:41:10 ►
you look at the ocean
00:41:11 ►
and you see it has infinite
00:41:13 ►
structure and complexity
00:41:14 ►
and nevertheless it could never function
00:41:17 ►
as a brain
00:41:18 ►
I think that, I mean the brain is
00:41:21 ►
in the neurophysiology
00:41:23 ►
it presents to the experimentalist,
00:41:26 ►
certainly much simpler than the mind.
00:41:29 ►
It’s a poor shadow of a mind.
00:41:32 ►
And its structure is definitely richer.
00:41:34 ►
I mean, it cannot function through electromagnetic field alone,
00:41:38 ►
even though all of the effects are kind of manifesting the electromagnetic field.
00:41:44 ►
For example, a given thought might be a pattern
00:41:46 ►
where electromagnetic fields in the extracellular space
00:41:51 ►
control clouds of calcium ion, for example,
00:41:58 ►
that we can think of them as clouds in the sky
00:42:00 ►
that are being pulled this way and that electromagnetically,
00:42:03 ►
and then if there’s a large number of them
00:42:04 ►
adjacent to some empty receptors or something,
00:42:08 ►
well, this motion of the cation
00:42:11 ►
is through the electromagnetic field,
00:42:13 ►
but the electromagnetic field,
00:42:14 ►
without some charges moving around,
00:42:16 ►
can’t really manage to do,
00:42:18 ►
to control all these multidimensional patterns
00:42:21 ►
where you have the layered structure of cortices
00:42:23 ►
with pyramidal cells connecting
00:42:25 ►
and then you have solid bodies of stuff like
00:42:27 ►
glial cells that the actual
00:42:29 ►
materiality of it, the fine
00:42:31 ►
structure with the ion channels
00:42:34 ►
and this and that, somehow that
00:42:35 ►
structure is much richer than
00:42:38 ►
the electromagnetic field. Just to think
00:42:39 ►
on the level of mathematical models, you have
00:42:41 ►
an excellent mathematical model
00:42:43 ►
I mean, not to identify these models with the field, but just. You have an excellent mathematical model, I mean, not
00:42:45 ►
to identify these models with the field, but just to think of an idea of the measure of
00:42:51 ►
the complexity of one of these fields as currently conceived by us would be the complexity of
00:42:59 ►
the mathematical model currently in vogue. So we have Maxwell’s model for the electromagnetic field.
00:43:05 ►
It’s all described by
00:43:07 ►
a tensor field
00:43:09 ►
to a bivector.
00:43:11 ►
It has four indices. It takes this
00:43:13 ►
much complexity. A simple
00:43:15 ►
tensor field describes the electromagnetic
00:43:17 ►
field in relation to
00:43:19 ►
in regard to an observer moving through it
00:43:21 ►
at whatever velocity in the context of
00:43:23 ►
special and general relativity and so on. For the physical fields in the brain, the usual models
00:43:30 ►
are tensors that are much larger that take into account this physical structure, symmetries,
00:43:35 ►
the creation and destruction of symmetries moving around, and so on. So the brain, as
00:43:41 ►
described by currently the better mathematical model, which will get much more complex as time goes on,
00:43:47 ►
it requires much more mathematical structure
00:43:50 ►
to even discuss the thing or imitate its behavior
00:43:54 ►
than does the mathematical model for the electromagnetic field.
00:43:59 ►
And that brain is much closer to the physical universe than to the mental.
00:44:04 ►
So I think the
00:44:05 ►
electromagnetic field is too thin to occupy more than a fraction, a fractal dimension
00:44:10 ►
of the entire structure of the field, carrying recognition, memory, how to serve in tennis
00:44:18 ►
and learning a new language and recognizing haiku and all this.
00:44:24 ►
language and recognizing haiku and all this.
00:44:32 ►
Yes, well, I mean, I am somewhat inclined to agree, but I think somehow it has to play this kind of interface role between the chemical and the psychic or the morphic realm.
00:44:42 ►
It has to interface with morphic fields somehow,
00:44:46 ►
because one has to have these planes linked together.
00:44:49 ►
There’s another question you see that arises.
00:44:51 ►
How does the electromagnetic field interface
00:44:53 ►
with the quantum matter fields of the electron?
00:44:56 ►
Because the electron and the nucleus,
00:44:58 ►
the nucleus structure and the electrons in their orbit
00:45:01 ►
are held in those orbits by quantum matter fields,
00:45:04 ►
not by electromagnetic fields.
00:45:07 ►
In fact, being opposite charges, if it were just electromagnetic,
00:45:10 ►
electrons would plummet into the nucleus.
00:45:12 ►
So the structure is actually maintained by fields which, in a sense,
00:45:15 ►
are stronger than the electromagnetic field,
00:45:17 ►
which resist it and override it.
00:45:19 ►
And the electromagnetic field sort of works around those fields.
00:45:23 ►
It’s a more subtle field, but it works around them.
00:45:27 ►
So we’ve already got one model.
00:45:29 ►
I don’t know how much attention people have paid
00:45:30 ►
to the interface of those two fields,
00:45:32 ►
but they are separate kinds of fields,
00:45:34 ►
and they interface because the electron and the nucleus
00:45:38 ►
are electrically charged, but at the same time
00:45:41 ►
their structure is made of quantum matter fields.
00:45:44 ►
Yes, well, if Nick Herbert were here,
00:45:46 ►
he’d say that it was the quantum matter field and not the electromagnetic field.
00:45:50 ►
Maybe he would say that was the intermediary between the physical and mental planes.
00:45:57 ►
I guess I should have mentioned in the beginning of this podcast
00:45:59 ►
that for the most part, today’s program was a whole lot heavier on scientific jargon than I normally like.
00:46:06 ►
During the middle of their discussion, I wasn’t sure if my brain was going to explode
00:46:10 ►
or if I was going to just nod off when their voices started getting lower and lower and lower.
00:46:16 ►
I did my best to boost the volume along the way, but there was only so much I could do in parts of it.
00:46:22 ►
That session actually reminded me of a workshop of Terrence McKenna’s that I attended,
00:46:28 ►
where during the Saturday afternoon session, a guy just flat went to sleep on the floor,
00:46:35 ►
and then he started snoring.
00:46:37 ►
Seeing the look on Terrence’s face when the snoring started was worth the price of admission.
00:46:43 ►
Terrence was really cracking up about it.
00:46:46 ►
I think I mentioned this earlier about getting an email from Steve,
00:46:51 ►
who lives in South Africa.
00:46:53 ►
Glad to have you guys down there joining us, by the way.
00:46:56 ►
He’s planning on building a 2012 portal to help focus the various aspects of that date.
00:47:02 ►
I got to wondering if any others of you out there are doing that, too. If so, I’d like to hear about it. Thank you. days in the Mayan Zolkin calendar. I’ll try to remember to put a link to her site with the program notes for this podcast,
00:47:28 ►
but the URL is easy to remember. It’s
00:47:30 ►
00:47:35 ►
That’s d-h-a-r-m-a-w-a-k-e-n-i-n-g-s
00:47:40 ►
dot com. Only one A in the middle there.
00:47:43 ►
Also, I’d like to thank Adolfo for pointing out a typo I made,
00:47:48 ►
or maybe it was actually some kind of a dyslexian Freudian slip
00:47:52 ►
where I spelled trialogues, T-I-R-E logs, as if I was tired of these logs.
00:47:59 ►
Hey, I really do appreciate you guys pointing things like this out to me.
00:48:04 ►
And Adolfo also asked an important question about the term universal human
00:48:09 ►
that I used in my Beyond 2012 talk at the Oracle Gathering.
00:48:14 ►
What I did, not very elegantly I know,
00:48:17 ►
was to exchange the phrase homo divinus for universal human.
00:48:22 ►
And if you’ve been following my essays and talks about this topic over the past few years, Thank you. Podcast number 11 featured an interview with the editor-in-chief of Foreign Policy magazine about his book,
00:48:46 ►
Illicit, How Smugglers, Traffickers, and Copycats are Hijacking the Global Economy.
00:48:53 ►
I hadn’t heard of this book before, and it really sounds interesting.
00:48:56 ►
So some of you may want to also check out that program.
00:49:00 ►
There’s a link to the Sea Realm on our podcast page, by the way, which you can find at matrixmasters.com slash podcasts.
00:49:09 ►
And also in that podcast by KMO is the first part of an interview with Rick Doblin, the founder of the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies.
00:49:33 ►
And in that interview, Rick mentions a lawsuit in which his organization is suing the federal government for the right to grow its own cannabis for research studies that have already been approved by other branches of the government.
00:49:42 ►
And if that topic is of interest to you, then you may want to also check out podcast number 14 from right here in the psychedelic salon.
00:49:47 ►
I think that’s the one that includes Rick’s talk at the National Press Club the day that lawsuit was being heard.
00:49:50 ►
Before I go, I guess I should mention that this and all of the podcasts
00:49:54 ►
from the Psychedelic Salon are protected under the
00:49:56 ►
Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike 2.5 license.
00:50:02 ►
Thanks again to Chateau Hayouk for the use of their music here in the
00:50:05 ►
Psychedelic Salon and thank all of you
00:50:07 ►
who sent emails and messages
00:50:10 ►
through tribe.net.
00:50:11 ►
I do read everything that comes in and I
00:50:13 ►
do my best to reply when I can.
00:50:17 ►
And so
00:50:18 ►
for now, this is Lorenzo
00:50:19 ►
signing off from Cyberdelic Space.
00:50:22 ►
Be well, my friends.