# Exploring robust interactions between human intention and inanimate / animate systems, Part II: theoretical.

AbstractIn this paper, two allowable windows of opportunity are shown to exist in the present physics paradigm whereby subtle energies (vacuum energies) might meaningfully influence physical reality. A multidimensional model is utilized to delineate a unique process path whereby human intention, from the domain of spirit, manifests events in physical reality. A quantitative mathematical connection between the two primary subspaces of this model reveals a vacuum component to any physical measurement and the conditions needed to make this measurable vacuum component be large in magnitude.

We address how the IIEDs Intention Imprinted Electronic Devices) used in Part I (1a) experiments appear to be able to broadcast the "prime directive" of the specific intention and how this broadcast might activate the key physical processes needed to yield our target experiment results. We also address what might be so special about our procedures that have yielded such robust results, what would be involved in their replication by others, and what we think this means for humanity.

Introduction

From the experimental data presented in Part I, (1a) several important insights can be drawn:

* The prime directive of the specific intention was, over time, fulfilled for each target experiment.

* The specific embedded intention in an IIED appears to act just like a thermodynamic potential to intelligently produce change in the needed physical processes and thus alter the basic properties of the materials involved.

* Some kind of "soaking" process with respect to this new field appears to be taking place so that, with the passage of time in this field, a critical new ingredient is being enriched in the environment. This is directly related to the site conditioning needed for material property change.

* Property oscillation behavior seems to be a natural manifestation of this site conditioning after some initial incubation period.

In a soon to be published paper, (1b) two important additional observations are relevant here.

* Changing an axial DC magnetic field polarity in a vessel of water from north pole up to south pole up produced a large difference in water pH for a conditioned space but not for an unconditioned space.

* A strong fan blowing on an array of thermisters registering temperature oscillation behavior did not significantly alter the character of the oscillations.

Let us see if there is a rational picture that draws these observations together and provides some basis for understanding them. We proceed by first seeing where, in today's description of physics, are there allowable "windows" through which subtle domain forces could act and perhaps lead to an IIED. Next, let us see how such devices, via a simple ON/OFF switch, appear to be able to broadcast a "prime directive" to the target experiments. Next, what aspect of this "broadcast" might activate the key physical processes needed to yield such target experiment results? Finally, what is so special about these acts of intention embodied by the IIEDs that they have generated such robust results when so many other approaches have not?

Two Allowable Windows

In the 1920s, Dirac utilized relativistic quantum mechanics to evaluate the interaction between a physical electron and the vacuum. (2a, 2b) His equations predicted not only positive energy states but negative energy state solutions. From this, he postulated that the vacuum consisted of all these negative energy states and they were all filled. Nevertheless, by stimulating this negative energy state distribution via a photon with sufficient energy, a particle (electron, say) may be promoted into one of the allowed positive energy states and become physically real (i.e., observable). The hole left behind in the negative energy spectrum is the antiparticle (positron in this case) that also occupies a positive energy state. To date, antiparticles have been found experimentally for all the particles known to physics. Today, the vacuum is seen as a chaotic sea of boundless energy (energy density equivalent to ~ [10.sup.94] grams per cc) with incredibly large destructive interference of virtual particle wave functions.

It is the QM (quantum mechanical) interactions between this virtual particle sea and the electron that constitute the ground state energy, [[mu].sup.e.sub.o] (e = electron), at conditions of standard temperature and pressure. This same approach applies for all elementary particles, which then may combine to form atoms and molecules. So the bottom line is that the standard state thermodynamic potential, [[mu].sup.j.sub.o], for any species, j, involves the interaction of j with the non-physical stuff that constitutes the negative energy sea of the vacuum. In terms of the discussion of the following section this largely means the interaction between a direct-space (D-space) particle and its reciprocal-space (R-space) counterpart (postulated to be the first structural layer of the vacuum).

A few years ago, one of us proposed that if, from a deep meditative state, focussed human intention could shift the degree of coherence in the virtual particle sea of the vacuum by even a tiny amount, the ground state energy of the electron, other elementary particles, atoms, and molecules should be appreciably altered. (3) From this basis, one might expect that [[mu].sub.o] could be altered by focussed human intention so it is necessary to include the following equation:

[[mu].sup.j.sub.oA] = [[mu].sup.j.sub.[infinity]A] + [DELTA][[mu].sup.j.sub.oA]. (1)

In (1), A is the medium, [micro]8 is the baseline standard state chemical potential in the absence of directed human intention and [DELTA][[mu].sub.o] is the contribution to be associated with directed human intention. It should also be recognized that evolutionary changes in collective human consciousness might cause a drift in [[mu].sup.j.sub.[infinity]A].

It has also been postulated that focussed human intention from subtle domains produces a change in magnetic vector potential, [DELTA][bar.A], in our physical domain, which by our standard equations of electrodynamics, produces changes [DELTA][bar.E] and [DELTA][bar.H] in our ambient electric and magnetic fields (4) (what was there before). Such changes [DELTA][bar.E] are likely to change the ambient electrostatic potential, V, from the baseline macropotential, [V.sub.o], in the absence of focussed intention so we also define

V = [V.sub.o] + [DELTA]V, (2)

where the contribution [DELTA]V is attributed to the effect of directed intention. Combining the standard thermodynamic formula for chemical potential with Eqs. 1 and 2 into the effective chemical activity, a', format, we obtain for the generalized potential, [[eta].sup.j.sub.A],

[[eta].sup.j.sub.A] = [[mu].sup.j.sub.[infinity]A] + kT In([a.sup.j.sub.A]) + [z.sup.j]e[V.sub.o] = [mu] + [z.sub.j]eV (3a)

with

[a.sup.'j.sub.A]/[a.sup.j.sub.A] = exp[[[DELTA][[mu].sup.j.sub.0A]+ [z.sup.j]e[DELTA]V+[[v.sup.j][differential]/2[differential][c.sup.j]] [[[epsilon].sub.A][([bar.E]+[DELTA][bar.E]).sup.2] + [m.sub.A][([bar.H] + [DELTA][bar.H]).sup.2]]/kT] (3b)

Here, T = temperature, k = Boltzmann's constant, a = chemical activity (a = [gamma]c where c = concentration and [gamma] = activity coefficient), e = electron charge, z = valence, V = electrostatic potential, v = volume of j, [epsilon] = electrical permittivity, m = magnetic permeability, [bar.E] = electrical field, and [bar.H] = magnetic field. Clearly, from Eqs. 3, both electromagnetic fields and intention-generated potential effects can influence thermodynamic and kinetic-limited processes in both organic and inorganic materials. Certainly standard EM effects are seen in the fruit fly studies when comparing treatments C and F in Part I of this study. Likewise, robust subtle domain effects are seen in all three target experiments (Part I).

A Relevant Theoretical Perspective

In expert systems and intelligent machines, hardware architecture with supportive written software allows the machines to perform within precise, predictable limits. Some variations in the preciseness of these limits can be expected if "fuzzy logic" is involved via the software. However, in relatively simple electronic systems (like an IIED), one has come to expect that the output performance can be completely and exactly characterized based upon the system design along with its specific material and electrical component parameters, i.e., the output response / input signal ratio is independent of any other factors than these. Certainly, the great success of computer-aided design (CAD) for both electric circuit design and semiconductor processing procedures utilized for integrated circuit fabrication underscores the utility of this paradigm in today's technology.

In quantum mechanics (QM), philosophical attention has been given to the possibility of consciousness affecting the collapse of the wave function, however, nothing specific and detailed has been developed to show how consciousness might alter the "numbers" in a practical application wherein consciousness is of significant importance. One of the difficulties here is that consciousness cannot yet be quantitatively expressed in terms of the potentials that enter Schrodinger's equation for the wave function. Another is that this wave function is limited to expression in our conventional four-space of distance-time. Thus, although QM supposedly deals with "all that is," the mathematical formalism is sufficiently complex that one does not obtain much insightful illumination from carrying out QM calculations.

One possible reason for the lack of physical insight arising out of QM calculations is because the base-space used in QM for viewing nature is our familiar (x,y,z,t)-space. With this choice, we are required to attribute wave-particle duality characteristics, non-local force characteristics, magnetic dipole characteristics, etc., to particles of matter. Instead of continuing along this familiar path, suppose we define a more appropriate base-space for viewing nature, one which quite naturally expresses both wave and particle behavior, non-local forces, electric and magnetic monopoles and allows both human consciousness and human intention to influence physical reality. The purpose of this section is to lay out such a model previously proposed by one of us.5

In a recent book, (5) Tiller has given a fundamental account of his multidimensional model of nature as a basis for explaining subtle energy phenomena. In turn, subtle energies have been defined as all those other than gravity, electromagnetism, the weak nuclear force energies, and the strong nuclear force energies. Subtle energies are, in fact, vacuum energies. This model is most simply illustrated by Fig. 1 wherein our familiar 4-space has a dual 4-space partner to comprise a unique 8-space. The dual 4-spaces are (a) our familiar direct 4-space (D-space) and (b) its reciprocal 4-space (R-space). This 8-space is embedded in a 9-space (the emotion domain) which, in turn, is embedded in a 10-space (the mind domain). The embedding frame for all of this is the domain of spirit (11-space and above).

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Since the natural coordinates for D-space are (x,y,z,t) and for R-space are ([x,.sup.-1],[y,.sup.-1],[z.sup.-1],[t.sup.-1]), this dual pair of 4-spaces provide, quite naturally, both particle and wave expressions for substance (a biconformal base space, (x,y,z,t; [k.sub.x], [k.sub.y], [k.sub.z], [k.sub.t]) is thus 8-dimensional). The electric monopole part of this substance responds to fields present in D-space, have positive energies, positive mass, and obey the laws of relativity theory. The magnetic monopole part of this substance is proposed to respond to fields present in R-space having negative energies (and is thus the first layer of substructure in the vacuum), negative real mass, and is superluminal. (1b, 5, 6) It is this R-space magnetic substance that is thought to write the de Broglie pilotwave envelope that is conjugate to the D-space electric particles. (6) Normally weak coupling is thought to exist via a substance of the 9-space emotion domain, called deltrons, which can resonate with both electric and magnetic substance without concern for relativistic singularities (the base space becomes (x,y,z,t; [delta]; [k.sub.x], [k.sub.y], [k.sub.z], [k.sub.t])). However, strong coupling is possible when intention from 11-space creates a mind domain imprint that, in turn, increases the deltron activity (5) (so the base space expands to (x,y,z,t; [delta]; [I.sup.*]; [k.sub.x], [k.sub.y], [k.sub.z], [k.sub.t])).

A special inversion mirror type of relationship is proposed to operate between the dual 4-spaces so that monopoles in the one 4-space create image dipoles in the companion 4-space. (6) This leads to our usual Maxwell equations in D-space (U(1) gauge symmetry and Abelian mathematics) and another set of Maxwell-like equations in R-space (SU(2) gauge symmetry and non-Abelian mathematics). Because of the Fourier Transform relationship acting between these two 4-spaces, it has been shown that the undulation intervals of the helical R-space waves control the position, velocity, acceleration, and locus of the particle-like moieties in the "now" of D-space. (6)

In the early part of this century, x-ray crystallographers developed the concept of the reciprocal lattice, and the importance of the Fourier Transform (FT) to the process of diffraction became appreciated. This eventually led to the generalized concept of reciprocal space wherein the phase variation along a line in R-space normal to a plane in D-space is controlled by the distance, s, of the plane from its origin. (7) The value of the reciprocal at a point with distance [??] along the normal to the plane of weighting [omega] is just [omega]exp (2[pi]i s*k). Thus, defining [P.sub.s] as the density of a particular quality in a D-space object (mass, charge, potential, temperature, etc.), the equilibrium conjugate quality in R-space is given by the FT, F(k), and vice versa. The transformation from D-space to R-space, T, and the reverse transformation, [T.sup.-1], for one-dimension, are given by

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.] (4a)

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.] (4b)

As is well known, D-space to R-space transformations of any number of dimensions can be treated in this way. (8,9)

One of the most intriguing features associated with broadening our perspective on the use of these Fourier mates expressed by Eqs. 4 is that they implicitly embody wave and particle expressions of a particular quality of substance that one can discriminate for our D-space object. Thus, one of the cornerstones of QM is implicitly built into physics when one attends to both D-space and R-space counterparts of an object. Interestingly, non-local effects are also naturally built in because the quality density in a particular small region of D-space is given in terms of an integral over the entire domain of R-space and thus separated D-space regions are connected to each other via the total R-space domain. For an object located at x = 0 in D-space, let its R-space equilibrium counterpart be F(k). Then, if the object is moved to x = [DELTA]x, its R-space equilibrium counterpart is now given by [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] F(k). We see that this counterpart maintains the same k-dependence except for a phase factor that grows with [DELTA]x*k so the effect is a similar oscillating function with k no matter how large [DELTA]x becomes.

The magnetic monopole/magnetic dipole image feature introduced here creates no operational problems for D-space magnetism or electromagnetism. It merely requires a reinterpretation of the magnetic quantum number for atoms. (6)

How the nested dimensional frames of Fig. 1 are proposed to synergistically work together to transfer intention from the domain of spirit to the domain of our D-space cognitive awareness is given in Fig. 2. The intention is first imprinted onto the 10-dimensional nodal network of the mind domain. (5) This primary imprint is transferred via a diffraction-type process to yield both a secondary imprint on the nodal network of R-space and an activation of the special emotion domain substance called deltrons. The deltrons allow coupling between the R-space imprint and the nodal network of D-space, also via a diffraction process. It is this D-space imprint that sets in motion all forms of action in the physical domain. (5) These three nodal networks give a granular structure to space that has not yet been revealed by present-day science. At present, most scientists think of space as a continuum.

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

The foregoing model requires a base-space of at least 9-dimensions with dual reciprocal 4-spaces in order to account properly for normal electromagnetism (with no human interaction). In this case, any higher dimensional inputs are treated as boundary conditions on the R-space nodal network. To treat human psychoenergetic phenomena, the model requires a base-space of at least 10-dimensions with higher dimensional inputs treated as boundary conditions on the mind domain nodal network. In this model, consciousness relates to the unknown wave substance that diffracts through these three nodal networks with the unique nodal point structures acting as consciousness to energy converters. (5) It should be understood by the reader that this is a postulated model and much research will be required to test its efficacy and degree of viability.

Although F(k) is generally a mathematically complex function (with imaginary components), its modulus [I.sub.R] = [(F([k.bar])[F.sup.*]([k.bar])).sup.1/2] is always mathematically real and considered to be positive valued (here, [F.sup.*]([k.bar]) is the complex conjugate of F([k.bar])). Thus [I.sub.R] is always a physically measurable quantity and is present in [any.bar] physical measurement via the deltronempowered version of [[??].sub.R] (the superscript [conjunction] refers to deltron-empowerment via the coupling mechanism between electric and magnetic monopoles). When this coupling is minimal (is very small), [[??].sub.R] is very small and not distinguishable in the measurement (leads to U(1) gauge symmetry behavior). When this coupling is large ([delta] is large via the presence of significant intention, [I.sup.*]), [[??].sub.R] is large and readily distinguishable in the physical measurement (such as we have found by utilizing our IIEDs). (1) This leads to mixed U(1)/SU(2) gauge symmetry behavior in physical measurements and a non-Abelian component enters. (1b) We have labeled this behavior "augmented" electromagnetism.

Broadcasting a Prime Directive

From the experimental results, (1a) one can conclude that the IIEDs have, at least under these circumstances, a real effect on physical materials, inorganic and organic. The simplest postulate would seem to be that such effects are somehow related to the EM waves emitted by the oscillators in the devices. These EM waves are actually photons, albeit photons with very long wavelengths and quite low energy (~[10.sup.-6] eV for a 1 MHz wave), and, as such, each has a de Broglie pilot wave built from R-space components. Our postulate is that, it is not the D-space interaction between the photons and the water, fruit fly larvae, or ALP that produces these unexpected results but, rather, it is the R-space counterparts of the photons that are interacting with the R-space counterparts of the water, larvae or ALP to drive these changes. From the theoretical model, the Maxwell equations in D-space couple to an analogous set of equations in R-space via deltron activation. (5,6) The mathematically real part of this interaction, at very low deltron activation, is what we call electromagnetism. At significant deltron activation, new terms are thought to enter this non-linear coupling interaction, and it is these terms that lead to the present experimental results in D-space. The addition of the mathematically real part of these non-linear interactions to the conventional linear interactions, we call "augmented electromagnetism." We will hereafter use the rubric "intention-augmented EMFs" to indicate that some new type of association with EM-waves has occurred that allows a specific intention to interact with the target.

From a thermodynamic perspective, consider Gibb's phase rule (10) which tells us, for equilibrium conditions, the number of degrees of freedom, f, available to a system of c components when there are p coexisting phases present. For the usual physical reality case with only three extrinsic variables, temperature, T, pressure, P, and composition, the phase rule statement is

f = c - p + 2. (5a)

Thus, if we have only one component (c = 1) and one phase present (p = 1), T and P can be varied independently (f = 2) without changing the phase so this is called a bivariant domain. When there are two coexisting phases (p = 2), it is a univariant condition (f = 1) that obtains and there is some constraint relationship operating between T and P (one is fixed by the other). When there are three different material phases present (p = 3), it is an invariant condition (f = 0) that obtains and equilibrium can occur only at a single point in the entire (T, P) variable space. At all other points in this variable space, thermodynamics requires material phase transformations to be occurring.

The present experiments tell us that, at least under some conditions, intentionality, [I.sup.*], and probably consciousness, [C.sup.*], are also thermodynamic variables for D-space. Thus, in Gibb's phase rule, we must increase our number of independent thermodynamic variables by two ([I.sup.*] and [C.sup.*]) so that the phase rule statement now becomes

f = c - p + 4 (5b)

and many more degrees of freedom are available for equilibria to occur between multicomponent/ multidimensional phases in nature. Now, instead of the expected invariant or univariant condition in (T, P) variable space, one can achieve bivariant or trivariant equilibrium (stable) conditions in D-space at the same T and P because of the unseen and unappreciated additional variables [I.sup.*] and [C.sup.*]. Because of this, it is not surprising that new stable phenomena can appear.

Our standard thermodynamics of homogeneous systems arises from a Taylor's series expansion of the Gibb's free energy function G(P,T,c) where P, T, and c are the pressure, temperature and concentration, respectively. It is from the first-order terms in this expansion that we gain the familiar thermodynamic relationships

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII.] (6)

where V = volume, S = entropy and [mu] = chemical potential. We note that [mu] directly enters Eqs. 3 ([[eta].sup.j] = [[mu].sup.j] + [z.sup.j]e[V.sub.0]) so that, for our three target experiments, it is [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], [c.sup.ATP]/[c.sup.ADP] and [c.sup.ALP] or rather a'([H.sup.+]), a'(ATP)/ a'(ADP) and a'(ALP) that are being varied by the [I.sup.*] imprint in the respective IIEDs. A more correct thermodynamics description, when mathematical singularities are present in the domain of interest, is to utilize Laurent's series expansion and now one sees the reciprocal factors becoming important. (1b)

D-Space Process Activation

A specific intention to be fulfilled in D-space requires a certain set of processes in D-space to operate in a particular way. This, in turn, requires that a certain thermodynamic potential map be applied to D-space with the rate of fulfillment of the intention in D-space being determined by the D-space kinetics involved. As an illustrative example, the D-space transport flux, [F.sup.j.sub.A], of the j species in medium A is given in terms of its mobility, [M.sup.j.sub.A], by

[F.sup.j.sub.A] = [M.sup.j.sub.A] [nabla][[eta].sup.j.sub.A], (7)

where [M.sup.j.sub.A] = [D.sup.j.sub.A][C.sup.j.sub.A]/ kT, D is the diffusion coefficient and [[eta].sup.j.sub.A] is the electrochemical potential given by Eq. 3a. Thus, one sees how EM and subtle domain effects enter this aspect of the kinetics (via Eqs. 3).

If one defines this required thermodynamic potential map, mentioned above, in terms of certain geometrical fields and potentials in D-space, the equilibrium R-space counterparts of these are given by various Fourier Transforms (FTs). It is proposed that there is a lawful way whereby the higher dimensional intention can be first expressed in R-space by these specific FTs so that the inverse FTs then act as forces on D-space to cause these desired manifestations to eventually appear in D-space and be experimentally registered via [[??].sub.R]. If we take the example of pH-change in water as our target, then some of the D-space processes that might be involved would be (1) the dissociation reaction of [H.sub.2]O, (2) the solubility reactions of C[O.sub.2] and [O.sub.2] in water, and (3) any acid or base dissociation reaction for dopant species present in water. It is presently believed that alterations at the vacuum level change the equilibrium constants for these chemical reactions sufficiently to bring about the desired changes. This occurs because a mixed U(1)/SU(2) gauge symmetry state has a higher free energy, G, than a purely U(1) gauge symmetry state so the former can deliver useful work to the latter. It is the IIED that appears to stabilize this higher gauge symmetry state until the locale becomes strongly "conditioned," which we propose to be associated with patches of order forming in this dynamically amorphous vacuum. The vacuum, then, is no longer isotropic so the symmetry state is changed. Much more research is needed before we fully understand which symmetries/ asymmetries are reasonable.

What Is So Special Here?

It is well known that most individual humans have intentions that swing widely over time so that the time-averaged effect over weeks to months is usually of small magnitude. Individual humans having long practice with one of the available inner self-management techniques like Yoga, Qi Gong, Sufism, HeartMath, etc., do much better, but there is still some time-averaging limitation involved. Precipitating a specific intention into a device during a 1-2 hour meditation session eliminates much of this swing.

Group intentional efforts in this direction, especially those focussed on healing prayer, have been successful both locally and non-locally. (11,12) From studies in the area of healers, one generally finds that those who are most effective exhibit not only significant inner self-management and physiological coherence of their bodies, but they acknowledge that it is "unseen" forces of the Universe that do the healing work through them. They generally think of themselves as a participating conduit for the passage of these energies/information into and through R-space/D-space. Such a communication system for information and power transmission involves both the effective band width and signal/noise ratio with respect to the specific held-intention and the power handling capacity of the channel at R-space/D-space levels. (5)

It is also well known that the effective output of cooperative group efforts depends upon both the number of units contributing to the group and the degree of internal coherence of the group. For such a case, the best possible result is given by (NA), (2a, 2b) where N is the number of units cooperating coherently in the group with average output amplitude for each unit of A. (5) When one begins to discriminate the "seen" D-space group from the "unseen" subtle domains group, the picture obviously becomes much more complex. However, one can begin to see that the effective N in this simple formula might be very large. This could allow the collective field impressed on the electronic device to move strongly into the non-linear domain of D-space/R-space physics. Utilizing an electronic device to somehow store this collective, specific intent in some presently undefined structural phase of the vacuum has many obvious advantages (especially if the processed IIED has been raised, in a key part, to the SU(2) gauge symmetry level).

There also appears to be an adaptation of the local environment to the use of these IIEDs so that the local environment becomes more responsive to the broadcast prime directive, almost as if there were a D-space "readiness" for this evolutionary step in collective human consciousness. Since things are first manifest in R-space prior to their "playing out in time" at the D-space level, the IIEDs may serve also as a kinetic mechanism whereby the higher potentialized thermodynamics can be unfolded.

Device Isolation Considerations

Early on in this experimental program, it was discovered that, even in the electrically switched-off state, some form of information leakage was occurring between the imprinted device and the unimprinted control device (even when separated by ~ 100 meters). This manifested as a temporally decreasing difference in the results found when the devices were separately used in the target experiment. The present solution to this difficulty was to store each device in its own electrically grounded Faraday cage after first completely wrapping it in aluminum foil. The theoretical rationale used here was that subtle domain substance interacts with D-space substance via a process that manifests a magnetic vector potential contribution, [DELTA][bar.A], at the D-space/R-space interface. This is thought to be a type of equilibrium partitioning. Since it is well known from standard electrodynamics that [DELTA][bar.A] can produce an electric field effect, [DELTA][bar.E], and a magnetic field effect, [DELTA][bar.H], (13,14) then augmented-EM radiation between the devices (even in the off-state due to fluctuating environmental EMFs) and the environment might allow information transfer. This, in turn, would tend to reduce [DELTA][bar.A] which would, in turn, dissipate the intention charge in the subtle domain. In any event, although not perfect, this procedure has allowed the intention charge to be stored in the devices for ~ 3-4 months and significantly diminished the apparent communication between the imprinted and unimprinted devices.

Just as a redistribution of electric charge in D-space leads to a D-space electric potential, V, whose spatial gradient is -[bar.E], a redistribution of magnetic charge in R-space leads to an R-space magnetic potential, [[bar.A].sub.R], whose inverse Fourier transform will give a D-space counterpart and whose modulus [[??].sub.D]([[bar.A].sub.R]) can be called a magnetic vector potential contribution (because of the non-Abelian aspects). Its time derivative generates [DELTA][bar.E] which redistributes electric charge creating [DELTA]V, a change in D-space electric potential. It is the "mirror" symmetry character that provides standard Maxwell equations at very small deltron coupling (a magnetic source-free state) (6) while strong deltron coupling provides a magnetic monopole type of effect via [[??].sub.R] no longer a magnetic source-free state). (15)

Conditioning, Coherence and Oscillations

Experimentally, the data shows that continued use of an IIED leads to stronger and stronger correlations between simultaneously measured pH-oscillations at two or more remotely located vessels of water plus Zn[CO.sub.3] particles. The particular remote locales seem to be growing in structural coherence with respect to the transmitter vessel locale. In the framework of the theoretical multidimensional model of the previous sections, this possibility is associated with the nodal network (NN) ordering in both R-space and D-space. (5) With respect to this model, it must always be remembered that events occurring in R-space are precursors to correlated events appearing in D-space at some later time. If the event imprint manifests in the high frequency region of the inverse time coordinate of R-space, then it materializes in ~ "the now" of D-space. If the same event imprint manifests in the low frequency region of the [t.sup.-1] coordinate of R-space, then it materializes in what we call " the future" for D-space. It is the inverse Fourier Transform relationship that yields the particular [DELTA]t needed from the "now" before materialization is possible in D-space. (5,6)

A brief outline of the proposed picture operating here is that (1) the mind NN is fully ordered, (2) the specific intention strength increases and the focus sharpens, largely due to inputs from cooperative unseen forces, (3) the diffracted beams from the mind NN are sufficiently strong to stimulate NN self-entrainment toward enhanced order at the R-space level (something like pumping a laser crystal towards the lasing threshold), (4) the intention imprint occurs at several different octaves of R-space (multiple orders of diffraction), and (5) with sufficient R-space/ D-space coupling, a D-space NN ordering reaction can also occur which, in turn, modulates the materialization of new D-space phenomena. (5) The greater is the initial degree of NN disorder at the D-space level, the greater must be the degree of R-space to D-space pumping needed for D-space NN self-entrainment to an ordered state. The [[tau].sub.S], pH-oscillations observed in D-space [sup.1] are thought to reflect fluctuating states of R-space NN order & consequently D-space NN order oscillations in time (and space). The Planck length and Planck time are relevant considerations associated with this proposed granularity of our multidimensional space. (15)

Necessary & Sufficient Conditions For Repeatability

Embedding subtle energies into a device and then using the device in a particular experiment tends to partially "objectify" the subtle energy. If the subtle intention-charge can be retained in the device for some months, then this would allow many different laboratories to perform the same experiment with either the same devices or with similarly processed devices. This would tend to more fully objectify the subtle domain imprint influencing the course of D-space reality.

From the authors' present perspective, the following is a list of the discriminated factors influencing these experimental results: (1) The imprinter's training, degree of inner self-management and internal coherence, heart focus, and intentions, (2) the details of the imprinting procedures, (3) the unseen network of forces cooperating with the imprinters, (4) the D-space design, components, and materials of the device, (5) the isolation efficiency between the physically identical unimprinted and imprinted devices (this includes shipping), (6) the particular D-space locale used for the experiments (affects the amount of conditioning needed), (7) the degree of inner self-management of the actual experimenters, (8) the held attitudes of heart and mind of the experimenters during the course of the experiments, and (9) the number of times the experiment is repeated in the particular locale.

In the beginning, it would probably be most efficient to utilize the same imprinters and devices for any replication attempts. However, after some continued experience with this mode of operation, it would be useful to explore other possibilities. We are at present exploring the length of conditioning time a new locale needs with a space conditioning device in order to move from the weak coupling condition to the strong coupling condition in that new locale (seems to require ~ 3-4 months of IIED use before full conditioning is attained and an SU(2) gauge symmetry state is stabilized).

Philosophical Significance For Humanity

From this work, it seems clear that human consciousness can influence physical reality via a time-averaged specific intention. One can deduce from this that D-space reality is not the primary reality but seems to be the consequence of collective human intention impressing patterns on more subtle domains of the universe. Thus, one's thoughts and attitudes held during common daily D-space actions appear to participate in reprogramming humanity's collective D-space future. Recognizing this as a sequence of creation events, one can readily see that adopting the discipline of inner self-management and self-directed coherence development at all levels leads to more effective creations.

One can also see that D-space is adaptable and that IIEDs can help to clean up old technology mistakes, enhance the efficiencies of present D-space technologies, and create a large variety of new ones. Clearly, this will involve a shift to a new physics paradigm for nature and our relationship to it. Further, by expanding one's mindset to embrace this unfolding picture, people are expected to begin to develop cognitive awareness of patterns of information in R-space. (15)

Pribram (16) has written extensively on the brain processes involved in visual imaging. From his viewpoint, a D-space information pattern enters the body via the circular lens of the eye and, eventually, it activates the input and operator neurons of the brain's cortical columns. This leads to overlapping receptive fields of interneurons, which are tunable by adaptation and habituation. Each interneuron thus acts like a bin in a computer that stores the averages of the part of the pattern to which it has been exposed. The ensemble of receptive fields (bins) stores the average pattern. When one plots these receptive field patterns, they bear a marked correlation to the Gabor Function (like a Hartley Function, the Gabor Function is a FT over a finite domain rather than over the infinite domain) of the D-space pattern impinging on the iris of the eye. (5)

A general view of this, then, is that cortical neurons act like individual receiving antennas in a large array converting D-space information into a diffraction pattern whose mathematical representation is very close to the particular FT. This information conversion to the particular frequency domain appears to be ideal for subsequent brain processing and brain perception. Conscious awareness of the outer world (D-space) information also requires the occurrence of an inverse FT in the later stages of the processing chain. For our purposes here, this indicates that both R-space and D-space information maps of the primary input information are available at some unique locations of our brains which suggests that it may indeed be possible for humans to have cognitive awareness of the R-space band in the overall spectrum of reality.

One last philosophical consideration for humanity that may arise out of this work is the realization of, and the acceptance of, the fact that there are many potentially cognitive bands in the overall spectrum of reality!

Acknowledgements

This work was partially supported by Ditron, LLC.

References

(1a.) Tiller, W. A., Dibble, W. E., Jr., and Kohane, M. J. (2000). Exploring robust interactions between human intention and inanimate/animate systems, part I: experimental. Frontier Perspectives, 9(2),6-21.

(1b.) Tiller, W. A. and Dibble, W. E., Jr. (2001). New experimental evidence revealing an unexpected dimension to materials science and engineering. Mat. Res. Innov.

(2a.) Aitchison, I.J.R. and Hey, A.J.G. (1982). Gauge theories in particle physics. Bristol: Adam Hilger Ltd.

(2b.) Milonni, P. W. (1994). The quantum vacuum. New York, NY: Academic Press, Inc.

(3.) Tiller, W. A. (1993). What are subtle energies? J. Sci. Expl., 7, 293.

(4.) Tiller, W. A., et al. (1995). Towards explaining anomalously large body voltage surges on exceptional subjects: part I, the electrostatic approximation. J. Sci. Expl., 9, 331.

(5.) Tiller, W. A. (1997). Science and human transformation: subtle energies, intentionality and consciousness. Walnut Creek, CA: Pavior Publishing.

(6.) Tiller, W. A. (1999). Towards a predictive model of subtle domain connection to the physical domain aspect of reality: origins of wave-particle duality, electricmagnetic monopoles and the mirror principle. J. Sci. Expl., 13(1), 41.

(7.) Buerger, M .J. (1960). Crystal structure analysis. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

(8.) Bracewell, R. (1965). The fourier transform and its applications. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Co.

(9.) Komrska, J. (1991). The fourier transform of lattices. Proceedings of the International Summer School on Diagnostics and Applications of Thin Films. May 27-June 5, 1991, Czechoslovakia: IOP Publishing Ltd.

(10.) Gibbs, J. W. (1957). The collected works, Vol. I. New Haven: Yale University Press.

(11.) Dossey, L. (1993). Healing words: the power of prayer and the practice of medicine. San Francisco, CA: Harper Collins.

(12.) Benson, H. and Stark, M. (1996). Timeless healing: the power and biology of belief. New York, NY: Scribner.

(13.) Kraus, J. D. and Carver, K. R. (1973). Electromagnetics. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Co.

(14.) Jackson, J.D.(1963). Classical electrodynamics. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

(15.) Tiller, W. A., Dibble, W. E., Jr., and Kohane, M. J. (In press). Conscious acts of creation: the emergence of a new physics.

(16.) Pribram, K. (1991). Brain and perception, holonomy and structure in figural processing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

William A. Tiller, Professor Emeritus, Stanford University Walter E. Dibble, Jr., email: wdibble@ix.netcom.com Michael J. Kohane, email: kohane@mindspring.com

Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback | |

Author: | Tiller, William A.; Dibble, Walter E.; Kohane, Michael J. |
---|---|

Publication: | Frontier Perspectives |

Date: | Mar 22, 2001 |

Words: | 6594 |

Previous Article: | Watching the mind as an individual research method. |

Next Article: | New aspects of vacuum kinematics. |

Topics: |