AREA52 - DEBRIEFED With Chris Ramsay - Neuroscientist Breaks Silence on Psychic Testing - Dr. Julia Mossbridge | ep. 99

Episode Date: August 14, 2026

Dr. Julia Mossbridge is a cognitive neuroscientist who studies the stuff most scientists will not go near. Precognition. Presentiment. Remote viewing. Telepathy. And whether unconditional love is the thing sitting underneath all of it. She came into the SCIF and we went for three hours. Somewhere in there we ended up talking about photons behaving like friends, gravity as a fuel source, why your body starts reacting to a random event before the event happens, and whether the mind is even in the building. We also got into the part of her story I could not stop thinking about. Julia was in a gifted program as a kid called SOAR. There was a small room she walked to every week or two. She remembers the bricks in the hallway. She remembers opening the door. Then nothing. Then she is back in class remembering that she does not remember. Years later she requests her school transcripts for a federal clearance and the teacher comment sections from first through eighth grade come back redacted. That is in her new book, Have a Nice Disclosure, which despite the title is not really about alien disclosure at all. It is about the other kind. Big thanks to everyone who sent in questions. We got through a bunch of them and they were genuinely better than mine. FIND JULIA HERE Website: https://juliamossbridge.comHer book oracle lives on that site. You ask it a question, it ignores your question entirely, and then it is somehow correct anyway. We tried it live at the end of the episode. Time Machine tool: https://timemachine.love Her nonprofit is Applied Love Labs, and her startup, American Electrodynamics, is building technology that reads the first chunk of an event to predict how it ends.

They were doing testing on us. By the time I got done with that part of the book, which I thought was the end of the book, I realized that that process had worked on me and that I had to write about my own internal disclosure of this thing. And, you know, you can hear me swallow and stuff because it's hard still, and I've talked about it several times. I always remember dreading that walk.

As soon as I get in the room and I close the door, I remember nothing. Then I open the door and I leave and I'm just confused and I go back to class. And I remember not remembering. I don't know if it was a drug, a hypnosis. What really makes me think

that there's something going on is I apply for a job in the federal government that requires a clearance. And they say, send us all of your transcripts from your entire schooling history. The comments area from first to eighth grade,

they're all redacted. It's hard to sort of recognize out loud that who you are as a person was sort of shaped on purpose. When I was in New Jersey, my girlfriend at the time and I, which became my wife, we were heading out of a building on a beautiful, let's say, Tuesday afternoon. We were walking for our cars to go to lunch, and as we were walking, the building was behind us. But as we were approaching the car, both of us at the same exact time, wrenched our necks over our right shoulder into the sky over the building. And we've seen this object that all of a sudden went like 45 degrees, fom! straight out, out of sight in a second, like, bam, it was gone. And we walked to the car.

I looked at her and I said, did you happen to see anything? And she completely said exactly the same thing I saw. It was incredible. Yes, it was only maybe two seconds or so. But just incredible. and yeah, there's we believe. Dr. Julian Osbridge, thank you so much for gracing us here in the skiff with your lovely presence. I met you first at the contact in the desert convention this past year.

We were both on a panel and I got to say I was just completely enamored with your takes on reality. And, you know, throughout this discussion that we were having on stage was really interesting. because it was this sort of back and forth about agency and, and the disclosure dialogue and everything else. And then, you know, just finished your book, have a nice disclosure, which isn't about alien disclosure at all. It's more about sort of inner disclosure and, this, this more sort of the deeper sentiments of dealing with something that is not understandable by your, you know, general human senses. Very fascinating. You're a very fascinating person. You've done incredible work in the study of Psi and the study of precognitive, you know, pre-cognition. All sorts of really interesting SIE stuff. And you continue today to just really spearhead this conversation in a way that doesn't feel militarized. Yay. And I think that that we need more of that, right? Because there is a spectrum. I always, I always feel like there's a spectrum of a masculine and a feminine energy with that.

this stuff. And like on the, on the, on the feminine energy, it's like, it's all crystals and woo. And on the masculine side of it, it's all like missiles and, you know, and war. And there are people on, you know, both sides of that spectrum that inhabit the middle. And that's where these really fascinating conversations start to take place because we're considering everything. Yeah. And we're sort of branching out. And yeah, I'm just a big fan of you. And so thank you for joining me today. Wow. I love that. What a great introduction. I'd like to frame it in time. Done.

Excellent. Yeah, so we just had breakfast. We shared our lunch and, you know, we were talking about a lot of things. And, you know, there's there's that part of the conversation that leads into a podcast that the audience doesn't get, you know, they don't get to hear. But a lot of that is like this dance of, hold on, should we save this? Yeah, we did that a couple times. We did that a couple times. Yeah.

You know, but we're going to be talking about all sorts of wonderful things today. including, you know, non-local consciousness, including time travel, including intuition and what does synchronicity mean in all of this and all of these wonderful ideas, but hearing it from a cognitive neuroscientist, I think adds a little gravitas to it for myself at least. And it definitely inspires me to ask you some of the more deeper questions today. But I want to start by just asking you, you've been in this field for quite a long time. you've you've seen a lot, you've heard a lot, you've studied a lot, you've put out a lot of, you know, papers on this stuff. What is, what is one thing in regards to how we are currently interacting with reality that you found to be most surprising in the last sort of 10 years that you've, that you've been looking into this?

Like what's something that struck you is, well, this is a surprising way of sort of filtering in reality that I hadn't really, pondered or thought about before. Oh, God. Great question. Hmm. Unfortunately, I think some of the things that are most surprising to me are surprising because my mind works so differently. So I don't know if they're so interesting. Okay. I'll be the judge of that. Okay. Because I just recently realized that, for the most part, people still think that you have to build something, like a spaceship or something, if you want to do time travel, for instance. Or you have to, if you were to build a conscious machine, you'd have to, like, build it. You couldn't just take something that was like a rock that was already there and make it

conscious. And so these things, it just occurred to me recently, are huge hypothesis stoppers. In other words, we're not going to hypothesize about all the things that we could do with our minds in terms of consciousness and how we can, you know, use a rock to, you know, become alive or whatever it is if we think that that's impossible. And we're not going to assume that another species or NHI or whatever you want to call aliens, we're not going to assume that they have that capacity because we haven't thought

of it yet. That's interesting. And so the underlying thing is just what are all the hypotheses that we just completely ignore because it never occurred to us? And how do we just absolutely not see what's there? Like for instance, another one's like gravity is fuel.

I really feel that gravity could literally be used as fuel. And maybe that's what UAPR doing when they're just bouncing around. Maybe they're just like loading up. They have to do this change of like the gravitational just a little bit. Yeah, it fills up their battery. Yeah, maybe the like magnetosphere helps them.

And so that's why they choose our planet. I don't know. But like just the posity of hypotheses that just come from our history rather than looking into the future and seeing what's going to change when we start to realize that the laws of physics are shifting. Hmm. So. That's really interesting. yeah, my brain's going as well. Like even, even as, you know, you hear stories about the idea of like spiritual energy imbueing certain items and like these things. Like, how do we know that we can't record an entire podcast into a can?

Right. And then somehow extract that information from this can or whatever. A million years in the future. Yeah, I'm not going to be the one to figure it out. Or maybe there's like, there's maybe a podcast in, you know, a tree root or something. Right. That's been fossilized. And if you're like into the Silurian hypothesis, is all we have to do is decode that. Right. And then we get all this information. But of course, we don't think it can happen so we don't look. And so we don't look and we don't move our efforts in that direction.

Yeah. Yeah. Wow. Yeah, that's a deep one to start on to think, you know, that's a great thought. Thank you for that. That's really interesting to think about because they're, you know, you don't know what you don't know. That's the other thing. It's like, you know, we can't hypothesize about stuff that we can't even, you know, fathom.

Well, and this is, this is. Part of them, I think AI is very powerful and going to do a lot of really amazing things, especially in medicine. And maybe hopefully if we use it right in our understanding of social interactions so that we cannot have war and things like that, that would be fantastic or not famine and things. But right now, one of the things that AI does is it clamps down on any kind of dreaming outside the box. So when I have conversations with AI about, what about this? it's lazy and it just comes back with, well, we don't know that that would be real and we probably

shouldn't, you know, it's just, it's like stops you. And so if we're going to, you know, be training people to interact with AI in school, et cetera, and we're going to, you know, have them figure out new technologies, they're going to come up against this wall. And when you don't know what you don't know, the last thing you want is something acting like it knows and then telling you like, that's not interesting. So this is a concern I have. Yeah, gatekeeping by something that doesn't even know it's gatekeeping. Yeah. Yeah, that is a concern.

But there's also the adverse side of that, too, where it's like we also don't want to indulge in people's psychoses and and, you know, gaslight them into thinking, yeah, no, absolutely. Everybody is demonic. And you're like, wait, hold on, you know. Yeah, no, that is interesting. Well, I mean, you could do experiments to test for this.

So you don't have to just say, well, wouldn't it be cool if gravity can be used as fuel, you can do experiments. And so that's what it ought to be encouraging people to do. And that's what it also ought to be incurring is more experimentation based on these ideas that seem really far out. But you can actually test. Yeah. Do you, which, which AI sort of LLM or which one are you more familiar with? Which one do you use if you had to use Sony. I use kind of them all for different things. Yeah. Yeah. What's your one for like, you clawed for research, I guess? Cloud for research. Open AI for just asking me good questions. Like I have an open AI model that I trained to, that's called a student of humanity. And it asks only questions. It just asks insightful questions and the idea is that you have the answer. And so it's not giving you any information. That's very cool. So that, I use that. And then notebook L.M I use when I use when I, I'm trying to get cool ideas about how to present things visually. So that kind of thing.

That's cool. It's cool to hear that because, you know, you hear a lot of reluctance in wanting to use AI, especially. Because a lot of people have this idea that AI is perverse and that it will sort of overshadow the human soul in some way and in some creative expression. And although that yes, if you let it, but, you know, it's nice to hear that there are good sides to it. And I think everybody, you know, has their own relationship with AI at this point. But I guess we're all just trying to figure out what's a healthy amount.

Yeah. You know, because it can veer pretty quickly. It really depends, I think, on how you've been trained. Like, I've been trained to be an independent thinker my whole life, even in my family. And then in school and then, you know, in the gifted program, even though there's all sorts of downsides to that. One of the upsides is, you know, lots of independent thinking. in graduate school postdoc. And so when I'm talking to AI

about some research idea or something, I don't see it as an authority. It's like a thinking partner. It's like, what do you think of this? And then it says something and I'm like, well, but you haven't thought of, like, that's actually just glib. Like, you haven't thought of this or this.

And it's lazy. So it'll be say, oh, yeah, you're right. You're totally right. Yeah, you're totally right. But it's, it's, I worry more about people who haven't been trained to think independently. So I think AI is more of a problem for people who are coming up and don't have proper education. So I think that's, and I think it's super helpful.

And the data are out on this. Like, we know it's already very helpful for people who are already mid to senior career. It's very helpful. But early career, it's a disaster to replace early career people with AI because then who's going to learn, who's going to get to mid to senior career. Yeah. Yeah, you're externalizing memory, your externalizing experience into this, yeah, digital thing.

Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. You know, you touched on something right there, the gifted and talented program. I know that in your latest book, you talk about that a little bit as well. I think SOAR, the program that you were in. Students on active research,

which is the creepiest name. Yeah. Yeah, students on active research. The SOAR sounds so lovely. You know. And the title was Sorgate, which that was interesting, right? Yeah, well, gate because of the... Yeah, exactly.

And then gate the program. And gate the program, yeah. So could you fill us in a little bit? I mean, I just, you know, I encourage anybody to go check out all the books that you've done, but could you maybe fill us in a little bit about what that was like coming up for you? You know, obviously thinking it's a little bit strange, the tests that they're doing, the cognitive tests and everything else. but also your research into it afterwards as an adult, you know, came up a little strange as well and maybe walk us through that. Sure. I started writing the book. I didn't know I was writing a book. And I'm like, I guess I'm writing something.

And I realized, you know, maybe about halfway through the first part of the book that it was about disclosing in yourself. And it was almost like a spiritual process, but also like a physical process. but also a social process. And by the time I got done with that part of the book, which I thought was the end of the book, I realized that that process had worked on me and that I had to write about my own internal disclosure of this thing. And, you know, you can hear me swallow and stuff

because it's hard still, and I've talked about it several times publicly. But nonetheless, it's hard to, to sort of recognize out loud that who you are as a person was sort of shaped on purpose, not just by your parents and not just by your community, but by something that you didn't even know it had an intention to shape who you are. And that's the part that I find difficult. And so I got interested as I was writing the book, in my background in this gifted program called SOAR that I was in and officially in seventh grade.

You know, when I say officially, I mean, so like I have friends who I still know who are also in the program. And so I know that I didn't make it up, right? But I started being tested for it and getting special privileges and stuff that the other students didn't get, I think, in kindergarten, because I have the test results. And then heavily in first grade. and then from then on out, there was just a lot of testing all the time. And for the longest time, I kind of bought into the story of,

and I think this part is true. You know, I do. I come from a very, an educated family with super intelligent minds. That's true. And I was very creative. That's true. I'm still very creative.

So, like, that's part of the story. That's, like, okay, I could see that you might want to put me in a program where I would get more stimulation or something. The other part of this story is they were doing testing on us that was not about that. And that didn't seem to be for our benefit. And some of which had deliberate, as far as I can tell, deliberate memory removal in this. And this is common among people who will talk about the gifted and talented education programs and they have different names, taggate.

There's one called MGM. There's one called Leap. There's one called Search. I mean, there's one called reach, and there's sore, and there's other ones too. But common among the folks who had the experience of being tested for things that didn't make sense, you know, it wasn't an IQ test, it was something else, is this sort of memory lapse thing where even in the moment, I remember not remembering. So that's the tricky thing. So there's a difference between, you know, talking to someone now and saying, you know, back when I was in, I was in, I was in, I, grade a million years ago, I don't remember what I did. Well, probably because you're 57 years old, you know, but in the moment. But in the moment. So I would go to this room about once every week or every other week, and I'd meet with this counselor. And I think I know who the counselor

was, but sometimes there would be this other person there. But I've no idea what we would talk about because I remember the steps going to the room. I could retrace those almost to the point where I know the colors of the bricks on the wall to my left and the colors of the lockers on my right. But then I get to the hallway that has the room. I opened the door. I remember that. And then it's the first one on the right. So I remember that. It's a small room like the size of a bathroom. It's very small. And there's, you know, covering on the window. So no one can see in. So that's a little creepy, but whatever, maybe in a counseling session, that makes sense. I always remember dreading that walk. As soon as I get in the room and I close the door, I remember nothing.

Then I open the door and I leave and I'm just confused and I go back to class. And I remember not remembering. So whatever happened in that room, yeah. So that was the deepest part of this kernel was the acknowledgement that that wasn't about gifted and talented education. I don't know if it was a drug, a hypnosis. Do you remember ingesting anything? There was a pink drink that might have two memories of. One memory is that I spit it out because they told me it was fluoride and it was chalky and kind of viscous. And I thought, A, isn't fluoride and B, you shouldn't swallow fluoride.

So why would you want me to swallow this? And then the other memory is of drinking it. But I actually had a dream last night about this. And so I'm still trying to figure out what that was. So let me just make the context a little bigger and then we'll come back to the dream. So the context includes also just too much hearing testing. So I've always had very sensitive hearing. By too much hearing testing, I mean it's not like I grew up next to a shooting range

and they were concerned about my hearing. They were pulling me out to do these hearing tests that weren't real hearing tests. I ended up getting a, you know, Ph.D. in psychoacoustics and communication sciences and disorders, specifically in sound and understanding sound and the brain and the mind. And I know what a hearing test is. These were not that, right? This is not, we're going to raise the level of a sound. We're going to lower it and we're going to figure out where you can hear it.

it was, listen to this. How do you feel? That's not a hearing test. Whoa. Yeah. So there was that. I do remember that. And they were administered by these folks in suits,

and they were always administered in pairs. So like two students would be there, called from the same sort of cohort, and they would administer these tests. They were not from the school. They would do it in the nurse's office. So I remember that. I remember the teachers, like I didn't have to go outside to recess. It should have probably gone outside to recess, but instead I was given a chance to do computer coding when the first computers came out in the late 70s.

And so I learned how to basic and Fortran and stuff like that. That wasn't, that could have been just enrichment, but there was this, feeling to it of that there was a goal, but I didn't understand what the goal was. So I just just did it because it was more entertaining. I was really bad at soccer and all the kids used to play soccer. And so there was that. Feels like a chapter out of Ender's game. A little bit. Like they saw me and they're like, well, so I have the copy of the test that I took in first grade where they sat across the board I was operating at like 12.9 grade level, which means, you know, you graduated from high school.

And they never skipped a grade. Like I found that, you know, just a few years ago. And I'm like, why didn't my parents ever skip me a grade? I don't think they ever saw the test. Because every year, I remember just thinking, we're going to learn the same thing. I'm going to go insane. And so. That's funny.

I actively, I remember in third grade, I was offered to skip ahead. and I was with my, you know, we lived on, I went to school on military bases my entire life. And I remember sitting there with my mom and the teacher and her explaining to my mom that I'm incredibly bored here. And I was like, I'd never vocalized that, you know, so I don't know how she, you know, said that. But she was like, you know, he needs to. And I remember my mom turning to me and asking me, do you want to go ahead? And I said, no, because I feared the social consequences. Hey, just wanted to take a quick second to say, thank you so much for all the support that you've given to Area 52.

Whether that's purchasing a ticket to the live shows, whether that's liking this video, commenting on another video, sharing it with your friends, buying something from our shop, which, by the way, we got a sale going on, 25% off all hats if you're interested. But just a generalized thank you. This is not a sponsor. There is no sponsors for this video, but I did want to take some. time to just thank you, the audience. Truly, truly, truly, truly grateful for all of your support. And I won't take up any more of your time.

Please enjoy the rest of the podcast. Yeah, see, so I think they did it differently with boys and girls. So there were plenty of boys that were skipped ahead in my school. And I was jealous. They never asked me the question. Weird. I don't know if it's because they wanted to study me for longer, which is what I suspect, or what. So it turns out.

So I'm starting to get this information, but it really makes me think that there's something going on, and I'll get back to the weird counseling sessions in a second, what really makes me think that there's something going on is I apply for a job in the federal government that requires a clearance. And they say, send us all of your transcripts from your entire schooling history. So I take that very literally, and I go back to, like, first grade, kindergarten, you know, the whole thing. Wow. And I write them a note. I say, I need my transcripts. They're like, okay, So they went back to like microfege and they get it and they, you know, digitize it and send it to me. And the comments area from first to eighth grade, they're all redacted.

So that's what made me. So I said, sorry, I'm me. So I think I get to see these. And they're like, yeah, no, wait, this is what we have. Like, we don't have the unredacted version. Luckily, my mom has at least the first grade one. So I was able to compare the unredacted with the redacted, and I saw that what was redacted are all the notes from all the teachers talking about me. And what were those notes?

Just like Julia is an amazing storyteller. She's reading at a high level, blah, blah, blah, blah. She helps the other students, blah, stuff like that. How would that? Why would they redact that? Because as you get older in the first through eighth, is all the same school first through eighth grade. As you get older, there's going to be notes about we take her out for, you know, four trin and, you know, four trin and, basic training.

Oh. She goes, you know, to the office a lot. We don't know why. She has lots of stomach aches. We don't understand why. She seems to have lots of ear infections. We don't understand why. You know, she's now in the gifted program.

So there's no record of me being in the gifted program on the transcript anymore. And a lot of unconsensual things, I suppose, like that they didn't run by your parents. Yeah. So that's my thought. Sure. So that made me think, oh, God. The other thing that made me think there's something going on is, the reason why I applied for this job in the federal government is I had backing up,

I got a call from this organization that I had applied to, and they said, you know, back in January or February, you sent us a resume, we think we'd like to talk with you about a particular job. And I said, oh, really interesting, that's cool. but four days before that, I had sent a FOIA request about my SOAR stuff to FOIA. I'd said, I really want to understand this program. This is the deal. Can you just send me any information you have about this?

And if there's any relationship with, I had targeted the Air Force, because I thought maybe there was a relationship with the Air Force. It's called SOAR. I don't know. And so four days later, I get this. Oh, we want to recruit you a call. And so we have a conversation like, this is interesting. and then so they say, okay, you pass this interview, you know,

next thing is the cognitive testing. We're going to do some background research on you, and then you'll, you know, pass forward to the cognitive testing if that works. And so then I think it's like a couple days later, I get an email from the FOIA people saying, would you like to drop your request? Because it might be hard for us to find out this information, unless you exactly know what program it was.

Now, the FOIA just doesn't act that quickly, right? No. I mean, so. No, no, no. They're notoriously, you know, they've got a backlog of years. Correct. Yeah. So then I go, I start thinking, okay, well, obviously this seems like there's some kind of a relationship.

I'm just to see what happens if I say, yes, I want to drop it. I drop it. Three minutes later, I wrote it down in my journal. I get a call. Oh, you've been passed to the cognitive testing for that job. Whoa. So you think there's a direct relationship there, direct, direct, correlation between dropping the FOIA request and getting passed to the next step.

And the next step was, of course, more cognitive testing, which is exactly what I'm used to. I mean, like, again and again and again. So not a coincidence. No. And, well, I don't know, it could be a coincidence. Yeah. It just was a very interesting coincidence. Sure.

So I started getting like, okay, maybe there's something going on. And that's when I started working on the book. So, or that's when I, then that seed was planted. But I also called my mom. because I was like, I wonder what she remembers. And I just said, you know, mom, what do you think about that sword program I was in? Done. That was the question.

Yeah. She goes, well, they were studying you. And I'm like, did they tell you that? She goes, no, but they had to have been. She's like, you guys were smart and you and your sister, and I'm confident they were studying you. And who's they? I said, who's they? I said, who's they?

I said, who's they? And she just goes CIA. And I'm like, do you know that? And she's like, no, but like that seems like the right people, right? And everyone thinks it's the CIA when someone's doing something nefarious. But maybe it is. I don't know. Yeah.

So back to going to that room, this experience, I finally decided I would do some regression with some memory regression. I went to a UAP friend in the field, you know, who do you know who's not going to plant ideas in my mind? as I do hypnotic regression. And they went and did some research and they came back and they said, this person, this is a great person. So I contacted that person. Have I told you this story?

Yeah. This is just so burned in my mind. I contact that person. I set up an appointment. I'm scared, you know? And I tell my husband, I want you to be with me when we're doing this. Like, this is scary to me, you know?

Yeah. But that's the day before and I get a text from her. And she says, I'm sorry I have to cancel. I have emergency dental surgery. And I'm like, oh, totally get it. You know, when would you like to reschedule? I can't reschedule any time you'd like to do a regression. I will have emergency medical. No way. Emergency dental surgery. What the fuck? Yo, that's crazy. I know. And I was like, I looked at the phone and I was like, I showed my husband. I'm like, what does this mean? And it's like, he's like, either she was protecting me because she could sense something. Or she was being told. Or she was being told. I mean, if you want to be really paranoid and decide that the government or whatever is that efficient that she would be told, I would think it would be more likely to be government contractors than the government.

Of course. Yeah, government is a term, but not as an actual entity. Yeah. So either she was being told or she sensed that it would be a bad idea. So ever since then, I haven't done it. So then I had this dream last night. Have you asked her? Have I asked her about it?

You should ask her that question. No. I don't even have her contact information anymore. I don't even know who she was. It was almost like a shock to my system. It's like it removed my capacity to function about that in that moment. Does it cause you to be more curious now or less curious? I sort of, after listening to what happened to other people.

Through regressions? Through regressions or even the people who remember like Jordan Josac. Yeah. I sort of wonder if I want to know. I sort of wonder if it would be more traumatizing to know. And that's when I land on the protective thing. Right. So that's her having done this before.

Yeah. And clearly non-beneficial for the people involved. Right. And so there's a part of me that says. Right. That makes sense. Yeah. Maybe it's protective to not look.

But then I had this dream last night. But also, okay. Yeah. Please go on. So then I had this dream last night when I was, I knew I would be on the show. that we'd probably talk about this, and I had this dream, that one of the counselors, but this time it was a man, sometimes it would be a woman and man together, I think.

And I think it was her husband. And I think it was the counselor's husband who had literally been a boot camp sergeant in the Army back where the SOAR program started, which is near the Savannah River Nuclear Facility. By the way, anyway. So I, like near Augusta, Georgia, I had this dream that the male counselor was in my dream.

I haven't seen him in a million years, right? Wow. Yeah, and he's wearing all black. And he's telling me, he's a white guy wearing all black, and he's telling me, this is it, you know, you're going to do it this time. Like, I think we've got this. And I'm kind of like on his team and I'm like, all right, yeah, I think I can do this, you know?

Like, like, let's do it. Like, there's some kind of challenge. And in the moment in the dream, I don't know what, I don't have any history in my mind, right? But I have some, I apparently have some kind of subconscious history. Like, I don't have any memory of what we're doing in the dream as that person in the dream, but I have some kind of subconscious memory or body memory. And so I go, okay, and I go up sort of in my mind or maybe in my mind, body both. I'm like fly essentially. I levitate to the top of this tower that looks like the

Stanford Bell Tower. And I look around out of the holes, the little port holes at the top of the tower, and then I burst through the ceiling. And then that's when I realize I'm not, that's not my body, you know? Yeah. And I'm, I realize, oh, I haven't been able to do this. And now I'm able to do this. I've been stopping, I've been letting the ceiling stop me, like it's a belief thing. And it was in a frame where we were very much working together on this goal of getting me to be able to just burst through this and get away from the sort of rules of the physicality of things and to ignore that and to assume that I can go through things and then therefore I could. And then I look down at him and I go, oh, God, this guy is good.

kind of an asshole. Like I had this moment of I burst through and then I'm like, ah, and he's suckered me into this by making it seem like this is the amazing challenge that I'm going to do and I'm going to feel great and everything, but I'm not going to remember this. So it's all for him. It's all for whatever he's doing. That was my experience in the dream. Were you your younger self essentially? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And so, I mean, that's wild. That is wild. It's a dream. But I often get really useful information in my dreams. But there's, I mean, the only connecting point here is that you knew you were going to do the show.

You knew my talk about this. And then like maybe. Yeah, maybe it stimulated something in your subconscious that came forward. But, you know, just even dreaming about this man who you haven't thought about in years. I mean, that is kind of substantial there. And you mentioned Jordan Josick, which also, you know, that was kind of the goal from his conversations. and hearing him and reading what he put out as Martin there that was this kind of idea of like, yeah, get out of body. Yeah.

And like build this construct or whatever for them. But I feel like that's, and I know that the Monroe Institute does great things with helping people. It can be very healing. But also I feel like there's this piece where getting people to go out of their body is very unsafe for them. You feel that? I think not if it's not done well. It can be very unsafe. Because if you're out of your body, what can go into your body?

I mean, if consciousness can be free from the body, I mean, someone else's consciousness can like, hey, you know, you're a zombie right now. Yeah. Right in there. Maybe. Yeah. Maybe. Maybe.

I don't know. But if like if that's a real thing, it just made me think, we need to be careful. I guess I was trained in remote viewing by John Vubon. who, I mean, I guess, I was training remote viewing first by John Vivanco, but I guess this is partly his influence because he would say the safest place for you to receive information is inside your body. And remote viewing has a horrible name because it shouldn't be remote and it shouldn't necessarily be viewing. It could be all the senses. Right. But in order to do that, you need to be inside your body. Yes. Yeah, people get that confused with remote viewing. You're not actually going anywhere. This isn't an out-of-body experience. Yeah, your body's like a sensor for the information. So that, if that happened, if I was encouraged to do these, these things for the benefit of someone else, it's sort of a bummer partly because, like, cool, I could have done really amazing things that I don't remember that I did. But it's also a bummer because it was for the benefit of someone else. I didn't get to integrate it. Yeah. You know, as, as, as,

with my own directive and ethics. And then I was also apparently, according to that dream, you know, if we're going to use dreams as data, encouraged to go out of my body. The reason I feel comfortable using dreams sometimes as data is because I know my own dreams have been highly evidential in terms of precognition. And so.

Well, Dean Radin talks about that a lot as well. Or Dean Radin, sorry, Rupert Cheldrick, about dreams being precognitive as well and encourages a lot of dream journaling in that way and that... Not all of them. And so with each dream, it's sort of like, well, maybe this is just my opinion.

Sure. It could be a psychological metaphor for how it felt. But it still describes how it might have felt. Very relatable as well to the entire topic. Have you ever had out-of-body experiences aside from that? So, oh, see, and I don't even know if that, aside from that dream.

Yeah. So I have multiple dreams. dreams like that of where I'm having an out-of-body experience, but I don't... Never during a waking state? Not ever during a waking state, and almost like vehemently so. Yeah. Almost like I've got that lockdown. Oh.

Like, that's not going to be happening. I have. You have? Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I have two years ago, or two years ago, I suppose it was two years ago now. Yeah, I had involuntarily two nights in a row, woke up, hovering over my body, like, woke up. I was wide awake.

Were you at Monroe? No, I was at home. I had never heard about this stuff before. Oh, this is before you heard about it? Yep. Yeah, so maybe like... Can you tell me more about it? Like, what state you were in?

I was in deep sleep and then had a nightmare and then forced my eyes open in the nightmare to like wake up because I was conscious that it was a nightmare. Yeah. And I had to wake up. So I like forced my eyes open and then I was in my room. Yeah. But everything was like, I could see in the dark because I guess my eyes were used to it. So everything was like out of focus. Like it felt grainy.

Yeah. low saturation and felt this buzz, this incredible, like, deep, like hum. Like, I was a tuning fork and someone just slapped me. Like, it was like, woo, like this. And I was like, it was almost euphoric, like a nice feeling. And I just felt like I could will myself up. I don't even know why I felt that, but I just felt, because I've flown in dreams before. And I felt like, this is the same feeling.

I can just will myself up. And I did that. Scared me. And I started paddling down back to my bed. and then sort of woke up again, I guess, and said, you know, that was strange. It objectively didn't feel like a lucid dream. Like I woke up from a lucid dream into that, whatever that state was. And then I said, I wanted to happen again.

And I'd taken melatonin that night, which I don't usually take. And the next night, I was like, I wanted to happen again. And it did. And this time, I was like, I'm not going to be afraid. And I remember willing myself up. and this time turning around and seeing myself laying there and the fear like, came back. Oh, it was, I was scared the second I was in that state.

It's like you're, I always say it's like, like you're walking a tight rope of fear. Like instant manifestation will happen. It feels like what I felt like anyways. Like if I think about something terrible, like that will come upon me. And or good. So I just didn't want to think of anything. I'm like, just keeping one foot in front of the other type deal. And that happened.

And then I remember swimming back to my body going lower than my body, feeling my body as I falling through it. Was your back facing your stomach or did you have to turn around? I had to turn around to see. And then I just kind of like went like this. I went like this. I was going like this, paddling backwards to come back down. And I went past my body. And I remember feeling like my body as I'm going through it.

And like, and like, and I go past it. And I was like, no, no. You're like out of register. Yes, and I'm trying to like go back up. And I'm like, I didn't know you can go down. Like, that was very frightening to me. And then so after that, I remembered a conversation how about Joe McMonigle, Joseph McMonigle, during the time that he was at Stargate, that they had sent him, you know, on weekend retreats to the Monroe Institute to see if he can leave his body and to see if that would be more conducive for a more accurate remote viewing session. And so he would do this over the weekends, right, from Fort Mead and go there.

And I remember him telling me about this. and this is before I, you know, had an experience. And I thought, what, like, what is this guy talking about? Like, he's, he's... How can you leave your body? Yeah, yeah. Like, I was like, okay, this is weird. Like, I was buying everything else until now.

And I'm like, those guys, it was a little weird. Maybe a dream he's having and he's misinterpreting a dream or something, right? And so then I, when I had this experience, immediately I go, that's what Joe was talking about. Oh, if you want to turn it down to you. To you, I think you're here. Does this make it better or worse? That's better. No. I really want to hear your words, but then I was, yeah, I really want to hear your words, but then I was, yeah, intense. So then I was like, that's what he was talking about. That's the out-of-body state. And I was like, oh, my God. So I start, I buy Robert Monroe's book. I read that, read through a few of his books, go online. Everybody's having the same symptoms as I had. And I was like, this is objectively not a dream now. I know this because I didn't know anything. anything about this. It wasn't like it was my subconscious being like, hey, you know, this is,

I didn't know what an out of body was. And I had the same experience these people were describing. And so that's where I signed up for the Monroe Institute. I documented my gateway process. I made a little documentary about that. And then every day, when I came back from that, every day for like three and a half months, I meditated for an hour every morning at around 4.30, like it was super early in the morning. And then after about three months, I started having regular out-of-body experiences. And did you want that? I was trying to actively have it. Oh, okay. Because I was like, I wanted to try to face this fear. Yeah, well, I just want to know if this was a thing, you know, because I had it happen to me. And then it started happening where I would go into vivid dreams

or lucid dreaming and I would roll out of a lucid dream out of my body. But again, it's like happening in this nebulous sort of time at night where I'm like, am I asleep? Is this a a dream until one morning at 5.30 in the morning, sun's blaring in my room. I have no curtains in my room. And I meditate for an hour. And I put the headphones down. And as soon as my head hit the pillow, I felt the thrumming, the vibration. I was like, oh, it's happening. Oh, my God. And I just get up out of my body. And I was lucid the entire time. I didn't fall asleep for a second. And I get up and I walk around my room. And then I hear a female voice, which scared me. And so I look and I go right back in my body. But that short, 30, seconds happened during a lusive, awake state with the sun shining in my room and I didn't fall asleep. And that was the last time. I was like, all right, got my confirmation. How long ago was that? It was, uh, it happened, I guess, maybe not last year the year before. Yeah, two years ago. Do you think, okay, I don't know why I asked that, but do you think that, um, you just wanted confirmation or do you think you were practicing something? There's a part of me that thinks you,

I mean, you seem very familiar to me when there's a part of me that thinks you were probably in one of those programs, kind of like I was, especially because your dad was in the military. I don't know. Do you have any memory of that? I remember mouthwash. Like, that was a regular thing, like the pink liquid with the mouthwash. But would you spit it out? You would spit it out. Yeah, that's flora.

Yeah, exactly. Like, it was liquidity. Yeah, exactly. It wasn't viscous. It wasn't opaque. Other than that, it's hard to, it's hard. I don't remember anything strange in my childhood. But, again, I did, you know, I did like 10 schools when I was a kid.

So it bumped around quite a bit. Yeah. And my dad was enlisted. He wasn't like an officer. So it wasn't like we were like Air Force or anything. He was infantry. Yeah. So yeah, don't remember anything like that.

Yeah. Because you were so good. I mean, it just happened spontaneously. It happened spontaneously. I think it was kind of a perfect storm when it happened. But then when I tried it. it took like three months and multiple people I've talked to at a convention, the same convention I met you at, I was with like three other people and we were having this discussion and I told my

story and all three of the other people said for them it also happened at about three, three and a half months into meditating every day. Yeah. So that seemed to be like the common denominator between us four where it's like, oh, okay, takes I guess that much time to achieve like this kundalini or this like experience. Yeah. So it was really enlightening. Yeah. And for me, I don't seek it anymore, not because I'm afraid of it. But there was this, there was this sentiment of, okay, this seems to be like what happens to you when you die. Yeah.

This seems to be the phenomenon that people describe when they... Which is why I think it might be a little dangerous. Perhaps. But I also felt like, okay, if this is what happens to you when you die, and this might not be the afterlife, it might just be transitional, might be something else. what's the hurry? Yeah, right. Exactly. Like, people have the hardest time just staying in their bodies.

Yeah. And I was like, I got it. Yeah. But I'm like, now it's time to be in here. That's why I'm here. Yeah, that's coming. Yeah, exactly. I guarantee you I'm going, I'm going to happen out of body again.

I think that's really healthy. But I also think Joe didn't feel like going out of body helped him very much. Hmm. What's your, what's your memory of that? He did say that he had one. session. I spoke to Ed May about this as well, Dr. Ed May. And he said he had one session where there was a, you know, get out of your body, go into the other. They started with the, with the ping pong balls and the eye, the Gansfield sort of effect to like stimulate this out of body state. And then they said, get out of your body, walk into the other room. And the envelope, there's a picture. Go look at the picture and tell me what's on the picture. And he did that, but he couldn't, he couldn't physically interact the envelope because he was out of his body. Yeah. And so he just tried to like project. where he would be where that photo was taken. Yeah.

And he drew and it was like a one for one. Yeah. But he was able to do that anyway without going out of body. So it's a little tricky. Yeah, he was really good at it. Yeah. Yeah. the things we were talking about at that conference.

Yeah. Contact in the desert in this panel. And there's this idea of like, well, even if there are an NHI, if there's aliens, how can we be sovereign over our own minds? And I think that there's both a desire in the ego to be sovereign and an awareness or a meta-awareness in the rest of ourselves that, holy shit, that's not a real thing. Like, where does your, where do your ideas come from anyway? they don't come from your ego. Yeah.

Your ego is just a claimer. A claim is like, look what I did. Yeah. And nothing is invented. No. Yeah. Everything's discovered. Yeah.

Yeah. Even inside yourself. And so the idea of sovereignty, like, there's a little concern in this ontological shock, that the people who are worried about ontological shock, that will discover that, you know, aliens are doing mind control. It's like, kind of doesn't matter whether it's, aliens or your subconscious, you still don't have any control over it. Yeah, that's right.

Yeah, you have the illusion of control or what semblance of control you're trying to hold on to. Yeah, and I think that that's part of why that dream matters to me is because that's all operating in me, too. I mean, I can say that intellectually, like, oh, it's an illusion of control and stuff. But, like, it pisses me off that perhaps people had me do things that were really cool, kind of in a certain way, like feats of interesting import and nature, but that I don't get to know about them. You're robbed of the experience.

In a certain sense. Yeah. What do you make of that? Because I'm, I mean, I'm curious to hear your thoughts as well about where, because you touched on information there for a second. And in your book, you speak about this as well as like, you know, information. you know, rides on light to travel and that type of thing. But it doesn't have to, but it can.

But it exists sort of, I guess, omnipresently all around us. And we all have access to that in space and time. And I do believe that as well. I think that that's a sound assessment of, you know, I always use the example of if this Earth just disappeared, another one were to appear like stories around, you know, mythology or religion would vary. But math would essentially be the same.

And so where is that? Yeah. It's in, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, you know, before space and time. Yeah. Right. It's this idea of this informational substrate. If you want to think about it as, like, like a bunch of ones and zeros that don't, that aren't

being manifested on a page or on a computer. They're just presence. absence, one, zero, presence, absence. And it's timeless, it's spaceless, but it contains all the information in the universe from the beginning to the death of the universe. And then what we experience, in terms of human experience, could be what that grows up into. So this can, you know, sparkling water and these microphones and our headphones and our bodies, those are all the ones and zeros growing up into that. So the informational substrate sort of from

that arises our bodies and the things that we have and that we can see and feel and touch and taste and hear. If that is the case, then what is the mind? Where does the mind live? Is the mind in physicality? No.

You can't point to the mind. It has no mass. It doesn't behave like a physical thing. It's not in a place. It's not really in a time. You can shift your mind around all over time. So the psychological sort of sense of time or the sense of events in time doesn't live in the physical world. That's the mind. And so that mind really lives in this information space.

Mind really is almost equivalent with this information space. So should we be surprised when things happen in your mind where you have an intention or even subconsciously you have an intention and something just shows up? Some miracle occurs or like in your magic? Right? Something just comes together. Should we be surprised? Probably not. Right, because the mind is constantly living in that impossibility. It is of that. Yeah. It is of that information. It's just kind of leaking into the physical versus the opposite. The opposite. Right. Exactly. The physical, the brain is sort of this byproduct of the mind. That's how it shows up. Yeah. Yes. Yes. In a bug, it shows up in a different way. So also should we be surprised by telepathy.

Should we be surprised that people like autistic non-speakers who haven't been able to express themselves through speech start to learn to access the information directly without having to hear it from someone else? Right? Should we be surprised by that? I think all these things are sort of going to be reframed in the next decade where we're going to start recognizing because of this error where we decided mind had to be physical. Sure. Which is nuts. But anyway, I bought into it too, so I was nuts too. But because of this error, we've become surprised by these things and say they can't be true

when in fact it's like the essential nature of how everything is working. So I don't know how we started talking about that. I mean, I love it. So I'm really interested in this because it begs so many questions, so many new questions for me, like, is there a positive goal or a necessary throttling of our access to the mind or to where the mind is by our physical body? Like why is that a necessity, it seems like. Wait, throttling. What does throttle mean?

In a car, like, this is like. Okay, like dialing back the access. I know I'm probably like one of the two women you have on the show and I feel embarrassed to ask me. I don't know much about cars. But what does it mean? Just the dialing back of access to the substrate is clearly present. Like we're clearly being gate kept from having access to a certain extent. And when you say clearly, I want to provide some evidence for that.

Like, so it's not just the opinion. I can't actively use my mind to peer into the future in the past at will. You know, well, perhaps I can, but I just don't know how. But it feels like if we go, if we look throughout history, humankind has not been able to do that in a way that is, uh, repeatable or at all, like measurable. So there has to be a benefit to us not being able to do that. What is that benefit?

Got it. Filter theory of consciousness, right? There's this idea that the brain actually acts as a filter and a reducing valve is the original term so that you just get way less than the information is there because you can't handle all. You can't handle the truth. Yes, exactly. So you get this picture of the truth, and then we develop all sorts of theories based on this picture, which is wrong, but nonetheless helpful.

So yeah, that's like Donald Hoffman type stuff, perceptual interface of cognition or perception. So what benefit is there? If you want to make individual creatures, like if the universe, I don't know, it feels like something else don't want this, if, if, if, if, if, if the universe, I don't know, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if. if there are going to be individual creatures that have different dispositions and solve things in different ways, which is actually very beneficial to a species to have widely divergent minds. To data collection as well. Yeah. And data collection, if you want to see each individual as like an observer who's going to send it up to the mothership.

Like, if you want that, then you better not know that you can just get all that information all at once in one second. in one second. Right. And that all the information can be shared, because why have more than one person? So this points to a creator? I mean, if we're going to go down this road, I think it does because it's like, why else? It's like this idea, this sort of mystical idea of the creator wanted to know, you know, its own creation. And so the creator makes...

It incarnates into... It incarnates into all these separate beings. And it wants to know. its own unity. But the only way to really know its own unity is by feeling separate, truly feeling separate and not having access to the unity. And then it can learn the unity. And that's much more valuable than just knowing I'm one. Because then you haven't really learned it, right? So it's a really beautiful story. And it makes sense too. It's a story that makes sense. It's very compelling. you know and then when when if you want to ask is it real is it correct like can any story like that

be correct i mean can what does it even mean to be correct when you're talking about a mystical story so it's sort of to me by default correct because it's so compelling and it and it helps lead people at least it helps me go towards the good you know it makes me feel like there's a reason and there's meaning it helps my relationship with god so i say it's correct because Because what is correctness when it, you know, it's untestable? So what is correctness when it comes to these deep, mystical ideas? I think that what correctness is is that which leads you towards the good. Right, just, something that is just or her.

Or full of love. Yeah. But then you would, you know, simultaneously need the other half to even experience love, right? Which other half? I mean, the love. The love. Not you? Well, no, the part of the, the part of the love.

the universe that seems to be the opposite of love. You know, you would need that as well in contrast to even create it, wouldn't you? Yeah, no. So there's conditional love that would be more like that contrasty thing, and there's unconditional or divine love or universal love. You don't need where to be any other thing, right? It's like this giant love bubble that encases everything, including the informational substrate. there's no downside to that. So that's, there's no shadow there.

That's like, so that is truly foundational. So as we're going down this rabbit hole, in this cosmology, underneath the informational substrate is the one true substance of which the universe is created, which is love. Okay. Which is really that which connects.

And so ones and zeros can only exist. Duality can only exist in a substrate of, which connects. You can only have this separation between a one and a zero if you know that there's something from which they both emerge. And for you, you've seen that in your studies, that love is the foundational substrate underneath information below everything, around everything, the glue that binds it all. So not in my studies, because that's just that I don't know how to test that. Right. Yet. Yet. Not yet.

but aesthetically it sounds right to me. And I think there should be a physics of love to explore it. But in my studies, what I can test is the idea of, okay, if there is this foundation of love. And if people can experience unconditional love, I know it's a peak experience, it doesn't happen all the time. But when people are experiencing unconditional love, there's kind of a sense I have that if you're experiencing unconditional love, that if you're experiencing unconditional love, you're basically accessing this foundational, you're aware that this foundational piece exists. You're kind of always accessing it because it's foundational and everything, right? But you're aware of that access. And when you're aware of that access, that can allow you to access

this informational substrate that's growing out of the love. So imagine the love are like the roots, right? The love is like the roots. And then the little bushes are the informational substrate, right, right? The ones and zeros are like yellow bush, green bush, or whatever. And then the fruit from that is space and time and matter and energy. So the fruits that grows on those trees. So if you can access, if you can be aware of your access of that unconditional love, you're at the very base. So you have now access to the whole system. So the idea that I tested was, if people are feeling unconditional love, are they better at accessing that information? Can they go into the information substrate and predict the future, for instance, which is in there as much as the past, right?

And so I tested that first by mistake by doing this other experiment. And I, but I just happened to notice that the folks who were rated themselves as feeling a higher level of unconditional love, which was part of the experiment for another reason, were also significantly better at precognitive remote viewing. How significant? I forget what the P value was. but we only had 36 people, so it was significant enough that with 36 people you saw it. Wow. Then I did it with online.

That was an in-person experiment. Then I did it online with 305 people, and you could still see that difference. So, in other words, people who didn't feel the high levels of unconditional love were just at chance. People who did were significantly above chance and significantly better than the people who didn't feel that love. Wow.

So if you want to do precognitive remote viewing, there's probably other things that can help. Binaural beads, maybe even need. I think need is really important. Belief is really important. Personality type is really important. Your nature. But also, being in a state of unconditional love seems like it could help. And maybe that's because of this access to these roots of the trees.

Right. Like you're going, you're closer to the source. Yeah. It's like you're more, it's like you're speaking the language of the trees, of the roots of the trees, right? You're speaking that language when you're feeling unconditional love. And so it's like you're in, you're allowed in. That's interesting because it does also relate to a lot of the alien encounter stuff. I mean, we talk, whether it's, you're talking about like the sort of blonde, you know,

blue-eyed, blajaran, Nordic, you know, benevolent sort of people that Georgia Dammit. spoke about and all these other people, or whether you're talking about a lot of cases as well, as even whether there are these insect mantis-looking creatures or whether it's the grays or whatever, but they always feel flooded with this sense of a familiarity, but in the sense of love and compassion, like they mean you know harm and they feel the sense of calming. And so do you think, like, hypothetically, like, that's what they're also using to communicate is they just have access to that substrate and for them to communicate, it's just like a natural more That's really, I love that interpretation.

It wasn't Jacob, what's his name who was on Skywatcher? Didn't he like? Jake Barber. Jake Barber. Didn't he just sob with a feeling being overwhelmed with unconditional love when he was picking up that one egg? No, it wasn't, it wasn't the egg. It was the Ategon, this octagonal sort of craft that he felt when he was piloting, that it was

like, yeah, this overwhelming sense of feminine energy. It's very sacred feminine, the octagon. Yeah. Yeah. Wow. Yeah. And the egg is also very feminine. Yeah.

I mean, obviously. I've always found that to be really interesting as well that if you're dealing with some type of, you know, not to get too much into like the Jacques valet stuff, but like if you're dealing with some type of control system that is toying with you or that is like, you know, controlling everything, if you were this big masculine energy, shooting guns and blowing shit up in the desert at a range, you know, from. for these nefarious, you know, contractors or whatever, like, and you were trying to, like, beam something down and get, you know, your psionic assets and microwave cannons and what would you get? Right. What would you get? What would you get? Yeah. Yeah.

Right? Like, good luck. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It's inert and it just plopped in the sand. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. I, um, I think that. many times this goes back to the sovereignty thing. Many times people I've talked to who are in that community, the shooting things in the desert community, are really good guys. They're scared of not being in control.

And so their response to Jacob Barber's experience is he was being mind-controlled. Like that's the way they get in is through making you feel love if they're controlling your mind, right? As opposed to, which could be true, but also I kind of think it's just fear of being out of control and the sacred feminine. I think that there's also your interpretation, which is if you actually are sophisticated

enough culture, you're not interested in war. Like war is so primitive. It's just not interesting. You're aware that we're all interdependent. You're aware that conscious does is everywhere. You're aware that there's this informational substrate and that love underlies it in this world picture. And so you're just giving people a taste. You're just trying to give people a taste. A nudge in the right direction. Just like, folks, like, this is the key.

So I do think of it as a medium. I talked about this. I wrote an article on medium called How to Avoid the Time Wars. It's about different kinds of time travel and about, you know, the possibility for time wars and the way that we have to relate to our future selves. We assume, for instance, that there's at least an informational time travel machine where you could send information back in time. So let's assume that. So in order to relate to our future selves who are sending us messages, we don't trust ourselves right now.

We wouldn't trust ourselves to send us messages. And if we got the message and it was really clear, we'd be like, well, this is bullshit. Someone's trying to pull one over on me, you know. And so the only way to really move forward and avoid those kind of time. wars across time is to move into unconditional love and use it as a medium to send these messages to use those routes as a medium to send that information. And so that's the like dominating principle. I had to use the word domination in this context. But in any case, primary principle in my startup. Can I tell you about my startup? Yes, please. Okay, so there's

different kinds of time travel, mental time travel, informational time travel, physical time travel. And when I say these with such confidence, it's just because I made them up, so I'm really confident that I made them up. Okay. Mental time travel is like precognition. And it's also like memory, but we don't think of memory as time travel

because it's in the normal direction, right? We're used to being able to know about the past, even though we don't really know about the past, but we're used to thinking we do. But precognition is like mental time travel, knowing something about the future that you can't know through other means. There's informational time travel,

which is just getting information, sent back to you in time without using precognition. So, like, potentially using a device, like, if we could reconfigure this soundboard to give us informational time travel, it would tell us about the sounds in the future by sliding up it down according to what would happen in the future. Yeah. That would be informational time travel. And then physical time travel is what, you know, all the sci-fi stuff is about.

Like, you actually send a chicken back in time and then a person. I do wonder a lot about once you develop informational time travel, why you would want to develop physical time travel. Because with physical time travel, if your goal is to send a message back in time or to go to the future and get... Change the past. Or change the past.

It's all informational. You can do that if you understand the informational substrate. I don't see why you'd want to go up to the physical level. Yeah, other than tourism. Other than tourism, but even that, you can just insert in someone's mind a memory of having done that.

Or VR. Yeah. And that speaks to alien visitations where people just have these things potentially inserted into their mind that didn't actually physically happen. But they're insertions because if you understand the informational substrate, you can do those insertions. Right, like downloads. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So, anyway, sorry to this physical time travel, but I do think there's this problem of being able to keep your memory with you as you do physical time travel. I think that if you were able to do that, there's a memory issue there.

So in any case, maybe I'm wrong. who knows. I, about 12 years ago, I got inspired. I'm a neuroscientist, right? Not trained in physics. My dad's a theoretical physicist, but I kind of ignore that. I'm an empiricist. I like to do experiments and build things. And so I got inspired to do this experiment that I couldn't let go of, and I finally was able to do it. And I did it. And it showed what I suspected, which is that photons at room temperature, play the same games together. It's like their friends. And let me unpack that for a second, because you look blank. No, I'm waiting to see what the friends do. The friends play together who stay together. So if you turn on a flashlight and you turn it off five minutes later, those friends are the ones that were emitted from that flashlight during that

period of time. And they start to behave as if the system knows it's going to be on for five minutes. So it's like for the photons, they know that they're in this group. It's called boundary conditions in physics. The boundary condition of the on and the boundary condition of the off and the future are both shaping this group's behavior. And so it's like they ignore the fact that one of those is in the future. Right. And they ignore the fact that I'm a different photon than you are. We're all just going to act like we're part of this big same group because we're in this group that at the macro level is called, what happened in that five minutes? Right. So it's like this is looking at the building blocks from the informational substrate that has the on and the off time to how it ends up manifesting,

which is this behavior of this group of photons in the physical world. So it's already aware of the substrate's intention. That's all that's what it does. Right. Yeah. And so you can then look at the first minute of this five minutes and know that at a relatively high accuracy rate that it's going to be on for five minutes, even if the person who's holding the flashlight doesn't know that in five minutes they're going to turn it off. Because it behaves differently than something that's going to be turned off in two minutes. That's so interesting. Yeah.

So that's my startup as we're creating technology that can then look at. at that first chunk of time to predict the future period. That's really interesting. Yeah. Photons are interesting, aren't they? Photons are super interesting. They're not really physical. Yeah.

They're almost, Richard Feynman, the physicist, used to think there was only one electron in the universe. I think that photons are kind of like that. They're like a story. and you pull them out when you need them like when an electron needs to You pull them through space time Yeah you pull yeah they show up

You pluck them You pluck them When you need them Like to balance a chemical equation Yeah Yeah So I think they're very related to mind Like I think they're in that one zero space

Almost more than the physical space And I think maybe that's true of all bosonic particles Photons are bosonic particles Which are very I'm sorry, I'm getting really nerdy. We can go. Is that okay? Absolutely. So there's fermionic.

I'm learning so much right now. Okay, Enrico Fermi. So there's fermionic particles that behave like electrons, neutrons, protons, protons, for the most part are fairmionic. They're behaving like almost like things that we expect are physical. You can't have two of them in the same place at the same time. That's ridiculous. Bosonic particles are like, ha, ha, ha, we're very different. They, they, like the Higgs bosonic.

toposonic particle, for instance, or photons. They can stay in the same place at the same time. You can get an infinite number of them in the same place at the same time, not a problem. Also, their identity does not depend on the location or the time in which they exist. So a photon that's coming here from your lights above us, at least probably a million of them,

are exactly the same photons that occurred back in 1723, when, you know, some historical thing was happening that I would know if I was a historian. So they're playing a different game. They're not playing this, like, march through time in a linear way game at all. So why not use that? Interesting to think as well of that,

even through, you know, religious texts, they were, you know, even if you look at, like, some of the Renaissance paintings of God or Jesus or the angels, the light is always emanating from the source, God, You know, it's always the light. It's the light. You always have to look at where the light is. And the absence of light will also detect, like, the people who are not enlightened,

the people who are, you know, trying to persecute Christ or whatever. Like, this is, like, in these paintings, there's this really vivid, interesting history of light acting as, like, the, you know, as God. Yes. And so to also have that be the case in physics, you know, after is really interesting to be like, No, you guys were on to something with those paintings. Yeah. No, we're always coming up. You know this idea of the Silurian hypothesis where there's been another,

a completely, it's like from Star Trek, it was another completely technological civilization that got as ramped up as we did and then destroyed themselves maybe through global warming, who knows, right? Through something, through something. And we can't find the remnants because actually it's really hard to find remnants of civilizations. because nature just does away with them really quickly. So one thing I keep thinking about is the story that we have is like it's just been progress and progress and progress. And when we think of like native indigenous communities, we often think of them as like, well, you know, we've progressed past that level.

Like that's more primitive. But I keep thinking, what if the Silurian hypothesis is true? There is this civilization, you know, millions of years ago that died out. We have no record of them. And, but what we do have is a record of those insights, of the mystical insights that came from the degradation. In other words, maybe a few people survived. And maybe those people are the indigenous people who carry some of these mystical insights

and then have turned those into these world religions. Maybe we, that is the future instead of the past. And that is what progress looks like when we begin to understand. Of course, science comes up with this same thing because it came from science. Millions of years ago, technological society that discovered this, got to this level, something happened, and it starts to grow up again. Right. It's like it's the truth emerging its head in an infinite number of ways. Yeah, yeah.

No, that does seem to be the case. And also even just a natural swing of the pendulum as well. where, you know, we were once entangled with spirituality or what have you, religion and science was all sort of one. And then after, you know, the age of enlightenment, we kind of started separating from that. And then the pendulum now, you know, swung as far as it could on this side where we're like, hey, we're away from all that religious nonsense. And it's all science now. And, well, we're discovering we can't build a microscope that looks, you know, we keep finding smaller things. Like, it just never ends. And so now we have to ask like, oh, is this the microscope?

Right, right. Is this like the instrument that we, and now we're coming back to that swing? To that same mystical stance. If you were to send, this is a question I've wanted to ask, and I do ask people who know a little bit about this stuff. But like, do you think it would be possible if, you know, because these photons or whatever, that you can be entangled through time and space and there's no real limitation there? So if I were to want to send information back, could I not simply, you know, entangle some of these or use the entangled photons and sort of have them in an on-off position suspended in this location or whatever? And then if you come to that same location in 40 years, could you not just like pull that information and communicate through time? Would that not be possible?

I mean, there's something called the no signaling theorem. in physics that says that you can't use entanglement to send information to do what you just said. Okay. Okay. But there's a lot of challenges to that hypothesis. So, and part of me, when you go back to the literature on that

hypothesis, part of it was motivated by the statement, we don't see telepathy in nature. Therefore, you can't signal this. A non-starter. Yes. And so if you trace back those ideas, there's a lot of motivation to build up that theory or that theorem.

And I always doubt when that motivation is like, well, we don't see this in nature. Well, you know what we do. Yeah, we do. There's people who are really good at telepathy. And so, how are they doing it? Well, entanglement seems like a really good explanation. Doesn't mean it is the explanation. Sure.

But. And ones in zero seems like a really, seems like a great way to send information as well. Well, exactly. And I don't know that you need entanglement at the physical level for that. Right. If you're working at the mind level, that could explain it even a deeper way. So it's just that there's, the world is opening up now as people are starting to recognize, just as you said, that we're coming across these discoveries by necessity because we're finding things that we can do that shouldn't work, but they work. Right? Yeah. That's why I'm so into building stuff. It's like, I've had to be. people read in the, especially physicists, just red in the face when I talk about just like yelling at me, do you not understand the second law of thermodynamics? And it's just, there's a feeling

among some physicists that there are science cops. Like, we're going to tell you that this, look, there's a law can't happen, no signaling theorem, or this or that or the other thing. And it's, that's not where we're at now. We're past that. We're moving towards what can we build that we didn't think we could build because the science cops said we shouldn't be able to. So I think this might be a little bit of my brushing up against my theoretical physicist dad

who would say things like, well, you can't do that. You know? Like there was ball lightning in our house and he would say, well, that's impossible. So that didn't happen. It's like, well, it did happen.

So how did it happen? Wow. Yes, that's the dogma of scientism of this idea of there are certain things you just can't challenge. And that's something that you've brushed up against as well with a lot of your precognitive studies. I take it as well where the, you know, the variance or what you found to be precognitive happened in such a small time frame that they feel it negligible. Yeah.

They think it's instrumental error or, you know, they just kind of brush it off because there's no way that that is allowed to be true. Well, yeah. And when you find it on the seconds or minutes time scale or with remote viewing, pre-cognitive remote viewing, it could be days, weeks, years. Could you talk a little bit about some of these experiments for the audience that you've done in terms of looking into, you know, instances of precognition and how you tested for that and what the results were? Sure.

Yeah. I've sort of gone to two scales. I've gone to the really unconscious physiological scale. and doing things at the seconds to, like 100 milliseconds to seconds time scale. And then on the other end, the more conscious, more deliberate, precognitive remote viewing, you know, minutes, days, weeks, etc. scale. So I've studied both of those. I kind of like to do the extremes and then figure out what I can figure out.

And so if you want to study precognition in the BISTA, body physiologically. It's called pre-sentiment. Generally, it could also be called these other things. I made up other terms for it to try to get it published like predictive anticipatory activity, so it didn't sound scary to people. It worked. I got it in a mainstream journal. But then I regretted it because it's so much easier to talk about pre-sentiment. It means pre-feeling. So it's the idea that your body can change its heart rhythm, respiration, EEG, you name it, whatever sensor you want on the body. before an event occurs and the event is random. So your body's responding to a future event that it can't know about according to the usual means.

So that's pre-sentiment. And the way you tested is exactly the way you would think. You hook someone up to whatever monitor you're using and you have some stimuli, some that are maybe going to make them scared or excited and some that are going to just be neutral. And you don't know and the person doesn't know no one on the planet. it knows, which stimulus is going to show up. But just before the stimulus shows up, there will be a amping up, like your heart rate might go up or your skin conductants might go up. You might sweat a little bit more if it's going to be an arousing stimulus. That's going to raise your attention.

And it will just be neutral or maybe go down if it's just a neutral stimulus. And that's the result and it's been shown just a lot. So one of the first studies I did was bringing people in and showing them like a picture of a gun versus a picture of a sunset and then they started crying because it was kind of emotional so I stopped that experiment because of the gun is scary and I had them just decide if they I tried to ask them to be psychic I said there are you know four doors click on a door and have that be we're going to find out if you won two dollars or something. I did this on a smartphone. And that was, winning was an amazing stimulus. So if they were about to win, their bodies would get excited. This was really, really, really obvious among men.

Among women, hmm, not so much. On men, if they're about to win, they're at $2, it's only $2, but if they're about to win, there's an excitement that happens. And it's all random. There's no cue as to whether they're about to win. But their body knows it. And this goes right into some of the literature on day trading. So looking at people who are really good day traders, I think there's this wonderful paper called interreception and surviving a London trading floor or something. And it's about that the really good day traders are the ones who can hear their own heartbeats. And so it's almost like they don't even need a sensor. They're sensing. into their own body's wisdom about what's about to happen.

Whoa. Yeah. So that's the physiology side. And then on the other side is the precognitive remote viewing side, which is draw a picture, write down some words, do whatever you need to do to describe the target you're about to see. You know? And you have, in my studies, I tend to say, like, you have two minutes to do this because I'm working with people who aren't very good and they're going to just do worse.

Is the target already chosen? Oh, no. Okay, so it's a random target that will be generated. Oh, in all cases, I should have said that. In all cases, you don't select the target until just before it's shown. So the person has to already have all the data that you're gathering. Yeah, before the target is selected. Yeah, absolutely, because no one should know what that is.

That's right. Yeah. So, but you might have a target pool. Like, we had a target pool of like 89 targets. Okay. And so they were going to get one of them. But they didn't know what those, and, you know, we didn't either know which one would be selected. So they draw their picture, they do their words or whatever.

they submit it, they wait whatever period of time, then they're able to see the target. Then what you do with that, in the past, what we used to do, and in most of my studies, what we used to do, is you take, how do you score it? Right. Because they're going to, like, draw a smiley face and some trees or whatever they draw, right? And you have to figure out that, is that most like a picture of an atom bomb, or is it most like a shoe? Right. And those are very different than what they drew because these are not gifted remote viewers. These are just regular folks. So what you have to do is take them, you give them to an independent judge who doesn't know what the target was. They don't know that the atom bomb was the target. Right. So you give them the atom bomb

and the shoe and you give them the person's little drawing and you say which one of these is this most like and then they make a judgment. And that's how you do that. And so you can do statistics on their judgments. So you get two independent judges and you can repair, et cetera. And then you show the results. And so the results look like people can do this, not great, but like a rate above chance, you know? They can do better when they're in a state of unconditional love. So that's interesting. They can do better, especially if they're women, if they're a little bit anxious. So that's interesting. So you can learn a few things about it. But sort of my favorite thing about it is that in the more recent work, we've been able to use AI, so LLMs,

to do that judging, to take away some of the human bias, and to find actually better and bigger effects that we didn't know we're there. So we recently worked with a lucid dreamer, who is also an artist, Dave Green in the UK. He actually asks people, you know, would you like me to do a portrait for you? And then he can lucid dream practically at will. And then he dreams the portrait. He asks in his lucid dream, you can, so here's the person, show me the portrait, and it poses over their face, the portrait, and then he goes back to sleep, and then the morning he wakes up and sketches it out. And so we thought, well, can we teach him to be a precognitive remote viewer in his lucid dreams? And so we did that kind of experiment with him. And the human judges could,

it was, they could not find really much correspondence, except for one case, which was really striking out of 10 dreams. And so, of course, good human judges found that case. Good, good AI judges found that case. We tried five different models, found that same case, but also found all these other cases and correspondences. And then we could do statistics on that. So now we could use that in my work with non-speakers to look at the similarity between how they're describing things telepathically and what the target is and get statistics on that. So it's really been helpful to graduate from human judging to AI judging. And that's largely been driven by Damon Abraham on our team, who's just really involved in understanding the phenomenon at all levels and wants to bring AI into that

kind of remote viewing scoring. It's kind of, it's something else. Do you think in terms of academia, and I know that that's like, that's, you know, the bad word here, but do you think that AI is a deterrent for them to want to acknowledge this type of study, or do you think it favors their interests because, you know, you say, you know, we're eliminating bias. We're eliminating human error by getting rid of these judges and having AI part of it. But do you see that as being a benefit to the people who are reluctant into looking in this? Or, or? Well, they hate it more. They hate it more. Yeah. Well, I think, well, certainly you're not getting completely rid of human bias because AI has that baked in. Yeah. You're almost using human bias to do

the scoring. Sure. But you get rid of things like positional bias. I see. Because you can give the same AI the two images in an opposite position. And it doesn't remember that it saw it in the other position. So you could get, right? You could get both. Whereas with a human, you'd have to give two different humans. It's a lot of humans. Will it make people hate it more? I think the people who already hate this stuff will hate it and say, oh, well, they used AI. Right. Right. And, and And the people who don't will be like, cool, they used AI. And the depth, I mean, I think we should talk about this. The depth of the bias and where it comes from is really interesting to me.

Because this is what I've been trying to work with forever. I mean, in my professional career sense, I think maybe 1996, I've been trying to work with this, just notice and try to understand. what is it really that makes people think this can't be true and upsets me so much and it almost hurts me. Like I had professors tell me it hurts them for me to feel that this is the way the universe works. Like it hurts their feelings because they appreciate my mind and I have so much to offer, blah, blah, blah. And if only I would just, you know, present the more mainstream side of my work. Yeah, that might also reflect just where, you know, I'm assuming they're older than you as well.

So, you know, when you get to perhaps the later stage of your life, you're a little more reluctant into changing your foundational, you know. And you want everything to be nice and neat before you leave this place, perhaps. Maybe. Maybe. Or, yeah, I think that's part of it. I mean, I'm not necessarily like that, but I also have a high capacity for uncertainty. which I think a lot of people don't have, yeah, you do too, yeah. And so we can talk about these things in some kind of a generous way to be generous to the ideas without shutting them down. Yes. And without latching onto them either. Yeah, and without latching onto them because who knows, they're probably all wrong.

Yeah. I mean, we just have these little idiot human minds. You know, oh, well, it could be like this. You know, and it's just like, okay. Yeah. Maybe we can do experiments, but even what we perceive from the experiments. could be wrong. So, but I keep coming down to, there's this basic fear of, well, there's the sort of superficial thing about ego. Like, if I'm wrong about the way the universe works, then I guess I'm

not as smart as I thought I was, and I was sort of basing my identity on being smart. So there's ego. But I think it's more basic than that. And I think it speaks to this fear we talked about losing control with a love feeling. I think it's sort of, I want to call it fear of being subsumed. Like fear of Freud talks about this. Freud was right about a couple things. And one thing I think he was right about is the fear that both men and women have, this is not just a male thing, of the mother bringing her,

you back into her womb, like not being separate. Wow. Like finding out that you're just not separate. Yeah, that you're a pinched node and not a detached. Yes. Yeah. And then what is the implication of that is like... There's no individuality.

Yeah, is like, I don't matter. But that's not really the implication. That isn't. That's the ego's belief. Yeah, that's the ego's belief, like, oh, then I will die. And it's like, no, actually. actually, you know, if your identity is not that you have to be an individual node, but that you're this whole ocean or this whole thing, like, that's awesome.

Yeah. Yeah, it's really a matter of your own perception of the same thing because, you know, I guess some people would say, oh, if everything is one and we're all connected, then nothing matters. Yeah. You know, then I don't matter. And where my perception would be, no, you matter as much as everything. else. Yeah. And you all matter equally. And you need to do your job and be your person. Like be who you are. But we matter as much as everything. This this matters as much as that. And we're all

equal. That's amazing. Yeah. But some people would see that as, oh, if we're all equal, then I don't matter. And it's just a matter of perception. Yeah. It's like which side of the ego are you? Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. But it's all ego. Because there's this attachment to mattering. Yeah. Yeah. I guess, I guess, you know, the one thing that comforts me in this. thought experiment would be, well, I mean, I find it comforting just generally, but I think the one thing that provides a little more comfort is the idea that memory, however, might be retained. You know, this seems to be the thing that we hear is that sure you, the loss of individuality might be, you know, a factor here through, throughout your life, you know, you maybe you lose individuality. Okay,

but what if memory doesn't go away? What if memory is still retained somehow? Yes. You know what I mean? Wouldn't that be enough? I think it would. To feel like you exist or to feel like you matter? Yeah, or to feel like your experience has mattered. Yeah. Is it enough if it's retained? I don't know the answer to this. I'm so curious what you think. Is that enough if the memory is retained in the whole? Yeah, without your individuality. Like, it's hard for us to separate individual memory from our individuality, but I think memory perhaps exists in a, in the whole.

in this infinite substrate, right, where individuality certainly does not. It's just this body or whatever it is. But the memory does seem to be information. It does seem to be... Well, the body would, though, because that's more information that grows into the body. But the import of the body is not there. So this goes back to your idea of sort of all of us are observers gathering, like different eyes, gathering data. And then putting it into the informational substrate, but funnily enough, it arrived from the informational substrate in the first place.

So it's extremely circular but also awesome. So it's almost like we're building a hologram. Yeah. Where we have different views of this information and making it more real. It's like it's this idea of co-creation and coming alive. What are we missing from that? I feel like we're missing as we play with this idea. I mean, we're only talking about the information here.

We're not talking about, you know, what you were saying prior to this. to the substrate of love sort of existing around the information. We're just talking about the information being passed on. And so there is the glue, I suppose. Well, so this reminds me of that picture you have on your wall of Balazars. Boblizars, like the heart-shaped field around the ship. Yeah. And so it's like, yeah.

If that's basically like the nest. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, that's what we're missing. Almost the nest from which this grows. right? Yeah. Yeah, like feeding it.

Or even like a Taurus. Yeah. More, less like a heart, but more like a Taurus where it just keeps coming in. How high do you think people think we are? They might be getting high at this very moment just by listening to us. Because we're actually not high, but I mean, I'm not. No, yeah. I think looking at your eyes, they're not that dilated.

I think you're not high either. No, no, definitely not. And I hope that this conversation is followable. I think there's people. Parts of it might not be as much, but it's fun. Yeah, I guess you could always wonder. I think that there's something that I'm wanting to say, which is that it really matters to me anyway,

and I think it matters to you, that different people, part of the purpose of podcasting is to bring these different people who have this such different views together. like you're creating that hologram. Yeah. You know, like that's almost like... Or at least mapping it out.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And I think it's a really important metaphor for us as we're moving into the new media. We often use media as a metaphor of the mind. You know, the mind works like the radio. We used to say, oh, the mind works like a computer. I'm wondering if the mind works like.

a podcast, you know, if that's an even better metaphor. And we're moving into that. About that, that's an interesting thought that I had as well where, you know, I've always thought the body as being some type of processing machine, right? Like some processor, like, you know, if information exists non-locally and sort of omnipresently and then we somehow filter, suck, pull or whatever pluck information out of the substrate and then apply it to this physical reality, right? This is the processor. What is the processor once the body goes away? Because information still exists. And we hear stories of people having, or at least, you know, through near-death experiences or throughout a body experiences, we hear about them being aware

that I'm still here, but my body's there. But I'm here. But I'm here. Well, then you're processing something. Where's the processor? So we talk about the body as the processor. It's a processor and a sensor of physical reality. The mind is a processor of the information it's receiving, right, from physical reality, but also of non-physical reality. In other words, like this information. So the mind is the process.

The mind is the processor and it doesn't go away when the body dies is the idea. Right. And so now it's able to process more directly. because it doesn't have that filter and have access to the informational substrate more directly. So the mind is, is, oh, is separate from the information then? So no, I think the information is the mind. Hmm. Like this informational substrate, so we're moving between individual mind and mind with the capital M or individual consciousness and consciousness with a capital C.

So the informational substrate itself, you could call it the mind of the universe, because it has all the information from the birth to the death of the universe in this worldview that we're making up. Okay, so that would be like the universal mind. The individual mind, this individual consciousness of which we are aware, is the filtered down access to both that and indirectly through physicality. Right. If physicality is born, if this cup, if everything that, our bodies are born out of this mind, this universal mind, then our little C consciousness is this separate sort of thing that gives us this theater of separation, this illusion of separation based on physical reality and whatever filters in, whatever leaks in from the informational substrate. And that ceases when the body goes away? That individual mind, I think, ceases when the body goes away. Well, although the big mind, the universal mind, would have awareness of, oh, that body is dead, but someone could see a ghost or someone, you know what I mean?

Like, that that person did exist in physical form. Yeah. Like, we're so used to thinking of, this is, I was thinking about this. I was in this hot tub today, and I was looking at the rain come down on the water. and I was just noticing we're so used to assuming that the universe is random and that there's no meaning, for instance, to the pattern of the drops on the water, that we're not going to look for a message in the pattern of the drops on the water. Like that would be silly and kind of crazy right now in the way science is thought about.

But so when we talk about the ones in zeros, it's easy for people because it feels like it has no intention, it has no, there's no, there's no, mind there, it's just ones and zeros. But it kind of feels to me like intention is that love seeping through. Like that's love is an active force that seeps through and then that intention is real. It's like the attention of a creator or something. And it could affect the ones and zeros. Well, yeah.

And it circles back. We can affect the ones and zeros with our minds. So it's this co-creative process. Yeah, ones and zeros might just be like a modern divination tool that, you know, we might have. Yeah, it might have been, might have been old bird bones back in the day, but now it's, you know, more sophisticated. Well, or whatever. Or less. Yeah.

Or just the same. Or just the same. You know, you were talking about the experimentation for the precognition. Was that, because I know there's Daryl BEM as well, Dr. Gerald Bem, who. Yeah, he did a bunch of pre-com. cognition studies, he did a bunch of them. And what I can say about those is the real upshot at a meta-analysis that came after him is that the ones that were more replicable were the ones that were unconscious. So they were the ones that were like fast, unconscious, not trying to do things.

The slower ones that took more time in between the information and when it was given in the future, they did not replicate as well. Okay. And so I think that's very telling. None of them were remote viewing. No. And there's been a lot of takedowns of his work, and that's okay. Like, I think there were some errors in there, and I think it's okay to criticize work and try to do better.

What I notice is that the precognitive remote viewing effects, which are big, and I think I did pretty good statistics on those, people just don't talk. They refer not to talk about them. and it's hard to find them in Google Scholar. They're sort of buried somehow. And so I feel like if you can't take it down, it can get buried. And that's where we're living right now. So I just like to talk about them because they're there. Of course.

They're real. And we know it Edmay, Dr. Edmay talks about this all the time. We know that there's a big effect size, especially for gifted room of yours. Yes. Yeah, and synesthesia as well seems to be a factor that was unexpected in measuring what a good remote viewer is when they did that initial 600-person sort of test to get that 1% down to that 1%. Yeah, and turned out they were all synesthetes. I really want to do an experiment where we look at time synesthesia because I'm a decent remote viewer and I notice that I have time. I mean, I know the way that the week looks, and I know the way that the year looks.

Like right now, we're in July, and I know where that is in space. And it has, since I was a kid, it's always been that way. Yeah. Like a synesthesia using perception of time, the calendar. Yeah. So it goes like January, February, March, April, May, June. And then you turn a corner, you start going down. Okay, so it's not like looking at a calendar and seeing like that.

No, no, no. Then it goes to September. and then now you're going this other direction. You go to December and there's this big gap between December and January. So like the years are really clear to me because there's all this space here. Do you have

synesthesia in any other form or is that? I do with numbers and personalities. Like each number has a personality up to about 25. What's an example? 13. I get a little gritty.

Gritty and 11. And male. 11 also male, but Kind. Huh. Generous. Interesting. It's very interesting. I mean, that could be, you know, has that ever served you in your life?

Well, when I was bored. Like instinctively. Like when you hear. Yeah. But I mean more so in perhaps like relationships or meeting someone and you're like. Well, if I hear that they're born in a certain month, it might be a little bit biased. Yeah. Against or for them.

And is that a proven itself to be the case? No. No, that's just my own little crazy. Your own little quirk? That's my crazy. Yeah. Okay. Yeah.

But it's, it does help me remember. Like, I can remember my hotel room or phone numbers or things because it's like, well, that number. What's that doing with that number? Yeah. It's a natural mnemonic. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

But I would love to find out if other precognitive remote viewers tend to be temporal synesthetes. That's the first time I've ever heard that term. Yeah. really interesting, really interesting thing. Because synesthesia itself is interesting in terms of, because it does seem, it's really easy to categorize people who are neurodivergent in today's, by today's standards, because, and not there's a spectrum of neurodivergency, but I mean those on the extreme sides of the spectrum, it's very easy to be like, oh, this person's clearly autistic or whatever, you know what I mean? But like, synesthesia is more subtle because it seems to really pop up. you don't have to be overtly neurodivergent to have synesthesia. And yet those people seem to be really in tune with this remote viewing stuff. Yeah, it's really interesting. There was a really cool synesthesia story in my postdoc lab.

I worked at Northwestern and in cognitive neuroscience from my postdoc. And I was doing EEG and I was helping out with another experiment that was looking at these like body lights on the body. You know what I call them like body lights? Okay. Can you, how many lights do you need to detect movement? You know, they use those lights in like animation. I see.

They put it on the joints. Yeah. And so how many of those do you need to correctly figure out the movement? So that was the experiment. So I was helping out. It wasn't my experiment. But I got to be there when this one participant comes in. And she's like, all right, yeah, I see the lights.

And you want me to respond about the movement. But can you turn off the music? And we're like, there's no music. And she's like, no, I mean, just turn off the, can you just turn it down? You know, and we're like, what are you talking about? And it turns out, and she didn't know this before, but that with those lights, she gets music. That particular frequency of light. Yeah, she's like, it's going do-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-de-de.

It's so cool. So, yeah, I think this way of integrating information, it's almost like, the filter has failed a little bit. Right. And it's just letting more information through and your body's dealing with it in this way. Yeah. And that's like sudden savant syndrome or that's also like these nonverbal children who are... Maybe that's like that.

There's like a glitch in the physical brain that allows, you know, more information to leak through. I think so. I think because I've been working with the telepathy tapes, folks, I'm in their documentary because I have this amazing team working with Jeff Terran. and Maria Welch and Natalia Mian and Damon Abraham and Polly Washburn. And we're really trying to understand not just this telepathy thing, but also just what is the waking daily experience of a non-speaking autistic person. And it is wild. I mean, it is very different.

But I keep coming across this sort of sense that their right hemispheres are unfettered. their right hemisphere where you're doing intuition, you're doing creativity, you're doing music, you're doing emotional social connection is just not suppressed as a regular, in a normal person. Whereas their left hemisphere, clearly there's something going on there because they can't speak. And generally we think of speech in the left hemisphere. So there's something going on with a different kind of wiring the left hemisphere. It's a current hypothesis of mine that is probably, other peoples, that is also making the right hemisphere unsuppressed. And that's kind of supported

by this work by Morris Freeman, this guy at Baycrest that I think I mentioned early on. Do you know about his work? No. Yeah, so he's a neurologist, and he starts to have this experience that maybe some of his patients can do psychic stuff, and there are patients who have left frontal hemisphere lesions. And so he designs this experiment where he asks people to move an arrow on a computer screen with their minds, and he asks his patients to do it. And he finds this directional effect where the ones with the left frontal hemisphere lesions, so just background, front of the left lobe is actually suppressing the right hemisphere, the front of the right hemisphere. So if you have a lesion there, which means maybe you had a stroke there or something happened,

those cells are dead. That inhibitor is no longer there. That inhibitor is no longer there. It's releasing the right frontal. So they're able to do this, you know, better than controls. In other words, statistically, significantly better than controls, at the direction that makes sense for the left frontal. So then he repeats it in a different experiment, and he uses transcranial magnetic stimulation to suppress, to reversibly suppress the left frontal activity

to release the right hemisphere, he finds the same thing. So that's very interesting. So yeah, I kind of think that's a little bit of what's going on there. Like there's a physical anomaly. There's a physical anomaly that's baking the right frontal lobe unsuppressed,

and so that stuff is coming through. And so that being said, then there is a way where you can induce this. Apparently, you can use reversible TMS, although that's a little bit scary to me. Sure, yeah. I mean, as soon as you master the brain,

it's very scary. Yeah. But, like, hypothetically, you could induce these things. Is that something you think that they were attempting to do through, like, the gate program? I knew you were going to ask that. Yeah, right. It's an obvious question.

Yeah. It's funny because I've been vehemently against doing myself any experiments about stimulation, including transcranial direct current stimulation, which is much lighter. Yeah. It's more like a 9-volt battery kind of thing. And then lately I started getting interested in it, but I haven't done it. But if I were, I mean, they knew this stuff back then. If I was a government official who was charged with this and was a neuroscientist, I would, I'd be like, yeah, let's try that.

Yeah. I mean, it seems obvious. It does seem obvious. And that, you hear about that too a little bit. right the um yeah because there is there like merciful martin jordan jordan jordan zack yeah there's there seems to be two opposing ends of this of of a way to interact with the substrate and on one end the end that you speak of which is this loving intention yeah this calming of the mind this like but then on the other side there seems to be like this opposite way of inducing

similar effects through trauma. And is that, because it, I agree. I just give a big sigh. Yeah, but it does seem like both of them, it seems at least to me, like both of them have valid outcomes, although, you know, one is preferable and probably takes longer as the loved one and probably takes more nurturing, or the other one is like, we can get instant access if we just like prod and poke this person and hurt them and in sort of, And, you know.

This is devastating. So this is the way people have, I believe, been thinking. Yes. I think you can get people to dissociate from their bodies if your goal is to get them out of their body and to go get information. Assuming the consciousness can float around like that, which I think we all kind of, at this point, we think that may happen. It's kind of like when people say, so it really works, you know. We know that abusing your child is bad, but it really works to make them stop their behavior. Like, if you hit your child, it's really true that they will probably stop doing the behavior that makes you hit them.

Like, yes, you're treating them like a dog. They will learn like a dog. Like that, that is true. And it's efficient. And the long-term impact of that is to often ruin people's lives. so now they're no longer efficient at anything. And the behavior that you were trying to shape is probably trying to make them what you believe to be a better person, but it's hard for them to do that.

And I think the same thing goes here. It's like, yeah, so for this one moment, you got what you wanted. And if you're really trying to make someone who can help you in the future and doesn't crack up or go nuts or, you know, eat themselves alive with some immunome, what do you call it, autoimmune disease or something, you failed because it really doesn't take that long to put people into a state of unconditional love and yourself.

But what happens is this trauma is passed down. The people they get to do these things have been traumatized themselves. It's generational. And so those are the people who are going to be motivated to do it. and they're going to cause the trauma, and they're going to create people who cause the drama. And so it's devastating. I really, I don't know any details about this except for what's talked about among survivors. And, but that's enough for me to say, like, we're going to have to look at a different way. I feel the same way about the polygraph. I feel like it's a tool of trauma

that is passed down in the intelligence community, like a hazing tool that people don't realize is doing damage, well, it's also being not very effective at what it's supposed to do. How so? Well, it's not effective. No, how is it damaging? How is it doing damage? Well, because people, it's screening for sociopathy. So it's like, if you're really good at just saying yes, no, when people accuse you of things.

So in the polygraph process, someone's using these tools, but they're also doing theater, right? This is all public information. They're all doing theater to say, oh, no, well, why did you put that on your forum if you did this or, oh, you must lie to people or whatever? They're accusing you of things to try to see how you react. I see. So it's like stress inoculation at the same time. Yeah. But it doesn't, but either if someone's, if someone has no problem with that and they can lie because you kind of have to lie to get through that because you're basically saying, okay, I never lie, which is not true, no one never lies, right?

Yeah. So if you're able to do that. without any level of stress, you're probably on the sociopathy spectrum, right? So now you're through that. Subconsciously, some part of you has been essentially tortured, and you're just going to ignore that and say, well, that's what I have to do for my work, et cetera, but it comes up later like a flower. And you can have insider threat. And you can have people who don't know why they're feeling frustrated at their employer, but they are, and they're going to maybe be able to be, you know, turned in some kind of way. So to me, it's going to fester. It's a wound that's going to fester.

So how would you reconcile then, you know, the ability to access this substrate information through trauma with your theory of having it be accessible through love? Well, you can do both. So you have access to it through both? I think you have access to it through both because if you go out of your body, like to dissociate, then you are more aware that you are, you know, not the body. And then you can have access to the informational substrate. But also I think you could do both because the universe is compassionate. I see.

So it's like the universe is aware or this informational substrate. is aware in some kind of way. I think if this as God, like, is aware, then it's like, I'm compassionally going to grant access. And many, many people who've had those disassociative experiences can access states of unconditional love because it's healing, because it's where you can go. It's like, it's the difference between,

it's a very short leap between disassociation and self-transcendence, and self-transcendence can be this amazing feeling of like I'm helping this thing bigger than myself I am you know I'm in a state of universal love and none of this matters and I'm doing this thing kind of like that dream I had where I'm like yes I can do this thing I can you know go rise through the ceiling and I can right and then I look back and I go oh but I'm doing it for this person who's not okay that that is exactly that and so what we need to ask ourselves is when if you can get this from unconditional love and you can get this from inducing trauma what is what is going to help us in the long run better sure yeah yeah and and yeah as i as i

listen to you i also realize that you know this is happening not due to the trauma but due to the trauma is creating dissociation from the trauma yes this is this is you're dissociating from the trauma in order to have access right Exactly. Not because of the trauma. It's the healing of the trauma. And so you could just cut out the trauma part and just do the healing part because everyone can feel healed with unconditional love. You can still get there.

Interesting. This is very interesting, stimulating conversation. And all of which I'm looking forward to this is one of those things. Like, when I went to contact in the desert, I had this happen to me as well where even my buddy, Michael Phillip. He asked me towards the end. We had a little interview thing, and he talked to me and said, so where have you landed with all of this, you know? And this is after I spent, I don't know, it's weird because in these places, you're having these existential conversations with complete strangers in the most liminal transient, like, hallways and they're just, hey, what do you think about death? And you're like, blah. And then you go, okay, I got to go get a sandwich. And then you turn here. And then someone else is like, I think. aliens or this and you're like, all right, let's go there. And you're having just a multitude of like the craziest conversations where like my hard drive felt like it was overheating. Yeah, it's like

the mundane and the completely atheric and everything altogether. And it's all of this. And so many different paths from so many different people. And by the end of it, I literally felt like my hard drive was like, oh, it's so full. Yeah. And I told Michael, and this is the same feeling I'm having right now, I said, I don't know where I stand with any of this, but I look forward to two, three days from now, like a workout at the gym, you know, where you get sore the next day and you just can't move. I look forward to two, three days once I've recovered from this conversation in a positive way, to then feeling stronger in my mind and being more, like, I guarantee you I'm going to have so many better questions and so many better connections to be made because of this conversation.

Same. Yeah. Yeah. This is really fun for me to have a thinking partner in this and the willingness to just zip around. Yeah. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. I hope we, I hope we were cogent to some extent here for for the audience. No idea. I have no idea if that's the situation. Yeah. I do want to bring up some questions from the audience because, and this is, you know, normally we get, I don't know, between 10 and 20, I think 50 people within a matter of an hour. Oh, cool. We're asking questions and multiple questions. And so I had to pick a bunch.

Normally, I just picked three, but I picked like maybe half a dozen because they were also interesting. So I'd like to bring a few of those up. That's great. Okay. Would you like to take a break before we do that? Yeah, yeah. I'm looking for more liquid. More tea?

Yep. All right. All right. Do you have any contact experiences? No other than, you know, seeing some things in the sky. Yeah. And then that one time throughout the out-of-body experience hearing a female voice.

Oh, so that wasn't an actual person that was in the house. No, no, no. Oh, that wasn't clear. I didn't know. Yeah, yeah. It was an indistinct voice. I've never heard it, but it was stern. It felt very stern.

Get back on your body. So I was trying to go through the window, and I couldn't get my hand through the window. Like they taught me in Monroe. Yeah. And then I went to go open the window in the out of body state. And then as I was leaping out halfway through, I hear right here, this female voice go, what are you doing? Oh. And I went, I shuddered.

Like, I froze. I remember tensing up like this and going, ooh. Yeah. And then, like, looking at my body and just, I didn't want to look where that was coming from because it scared me. You feel like you're in a place where you don't belong. Instantly, you feel like I'm not supposed to be here. But you didn't before that voice. Yeah, I did.

You did even before that voice. Oh, yeah. I'm instantly. You felt like you were sneaking around a little. Instantly as soon as you, because like when this happens, when the out of body suit happens, your physical body's here. This is happened for me and some other people as well as they described this. But like, this is, I'm inside my body and I'm like this. Now I'm like free floating inside my physical body.

Yeah. Where I'm like, oh, I could just like I'm. Am I going to latch on? I'm not bound. I'm not, I'm like, I'm like, unbound to my body and you feel that. Wow. And so that's what makes you want to just get out. I just play around. Because you're. Because you can. Why am I just lying here if I'm not attached to my body and you just kind of like you can just sit up? Right. And so I get out. But as soon as you're

out, you realize, because there is this tone, at least for me, like a like the entire time. And it's very ominous, like almost dreadful like for me. Yeah. Because you feel like you're in the upside down. You feel like, oh, this is not my room. Yeah. This is a projection of my memory of my room. But you're not in your room. This is a different place that you're not supposed to be here. This isn't a dream. This isn't your room.

This isn't reality. This is a different place. You're in a different place where there could be other things here. And you know that instantly. Instantly, I know that I am not alone in this world. And I don't know if they're here. I don't know what. I don't want to see them.

I don't want to talk to anybody. I just wanted one foot in front of the. other and I'm literally just like moving looking here blinders I'm like I don't want to look at anything else right in case and then as I go I hear this voice like all right back in bed and yeah instantly up and yeah all of that for me was really trippy because it happened during a waking state there was wasn't one millisecond where I fell asleep and I I looked at the time when I put my headphones down was 630 it was 630 630 and it was like 632 like every second was accounted for.

Yeah. When you came back in your body, do you feel like anything else was there? Do you feel like you were? No. Did you feel safe back in your body? Yeah. I never for once felt like that could have happened. I also feel, like I don't know, but I feel like when you have an out-of-body experience, we call it an out-of-body experience.

I don't know that that's what's happening. Mm-hmm. We called it that because we can see our body and see our room and wander around. Right. But as even Robert Monroe talks about it and as of I've experienced, it's not your room. Yeah. It's like an 80% out. It's your memory of your room.

Yeah. So who says that you're out of body at all, first of all. Right. You could be your brain literally has a construction of where your body is in space and what your room looks like and you could be wandering around in there. Correct. Or it could be giving you weird feelings. Or by locating? Yeah.

Right. You know, who says I can't be in and out of my body at the same time. Right. And also, I mean, I get that. And that's why this thing about getting veridical information, like looking in the envelope, ends up being important. But it's not important because you can literally just remote view while you're having an out-of-body experience if you're gifted at it. So it doesn't actually prove that you've left your body.

No, exactly. So that's where I'm like, I don't really, I don't know what I'm experiencing. When they say out of body, I think it's the easiest thing to say because that's what it feels like. Well, there's certain neurological disorders that will give you that experience. Right. Yeah. And even it reminds me of my dad's wife who has Alzheimer's. And she came home after getting surgery to her room.

And she said, this looks just like my bedroom. But I know it's not. And I just wonder how much of that. The dementia processes are similar to, like, losing the tether. To space time or... To space time or to being in your body. Yeah. Just that because the brain is being impacted in the way that constructs these things.

We forget that they're all constructed. Yeah. And so it's a reminder that all this is constructed. And you need an anchor. Yeah. You need some type of anchor to anchor you into that moment. Yeah. And if that anchor, whether that's space or time or the illusion of where you are, if that anchor isn't there,

then you're just kind of like, this feels familiar, but it's not. Yeah, yeah. Wow. Yeah, so I don't know that that's what anybody's experiencing, and that's why I don't have a fear

of, like, somebody else taking over my body because I don't fully think I'm even out of my body. Right, that makes sense. But I do feel like this is a non-physical reality that I'm currently experiencing. Yeah. I just don't know that it's separate,

and I don't know that I'm not in both. Right. At the same time, like perhaps part of my consciousness is projecting this, you know, simulation of a reality that I'm in now. Yeah.

And the other part of the consciousness is well intact in my body. Yeah. You know, I don't know. Yeah. When do you look down at your body, though? Yeah. Does it look like your... You don't recognize yourself.

Well, at least I don't because, like, when have you ever seen yourself with your eyes closed? Yeah. Right. Right. My husband takes a picture of me. Right. Exactly. But you look different.

Yeah. So you look at yourself and like, is that me? Like, it really is. Like, it feels like, is that a stranger? Like, and then you get the realization that it's you, but you're just not familiar. with. So the body doesn't look dead or? No, no. And it's, it's not entirely in detail. It's a little fuzzy too, like just because of everything, I guess. But yeah, I think what I heard was the more you go out of body, the clear it gets. Like you upgrade to like the HD version of it, like if you've

done it enough. So I had the very low res version for my first few experiences. I wonder who that woman was, if that was like your mother or? No, it didn't sound like my mother. It didn't, it, It was, no, it was a... Didn't sound like anyone... No. Was it human? Yeah. Well, it sounded like a human woman.

Yeah. But like stern is the only way I can put it. Not, I didn't feel like... Maybe it was me. Maybe. Get back on your body, what are you doing? It was like, what are you doing? Like, it sounded like what do you think you're doing?

Yeah. Like, is what the feeling I got was. And I was just like, I'm not going to even answer that. Yeah. And it was funny, too. I don't even know if I mentioned this in the video, but when I went to, to the window, beside the window, there was a rosary. I don't have a rosary in my house.

That's interesting. Yeah, beside the window. And so that, but that was one of the things where I was like, oh, this is not my room. Or it could have been some weird space time journey. Yep, exactly. Or some projection of my subconscious or something. Yeah, yeah. Yeah.

Oh, there's these amazing ghost stories about ghosts who meet each other from different times. Oh, yeah, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You know, and all of the above might be true at the same time. All very difficult to test, but super interesting. Yeah, very interesting.

Okay, we got questions. Yes, we got these questions here that I will pull up. We're just going to start anywhere here. Oh, I like this one a lot from JKP. Oh, cool. Ordin is synchronization, so maybe synchronicity in this field of research. I'm taking it in a different way, not synchronicity, but synchronization, like, between people or synchronization of different parts of the brain or like oscillations,

or coherent oscillations of different parts of the brain? Are you thinking synchronicity? I was, but I'm happy to go down that road as well. Yeah, so I think synchronicity is our experience of synchronization. So when we're something synchronized, whether it's our brain waves are synchronized with each other within our minds or within my brain and your brain or our movements are synchronized. Our blinks are, like when we're looking at each other right now, our blinks are getting synchronized, our respirations are getting synchronized. Our movements, we're both nodding our heads.

It's just unconscious stuff that helps us connect, right? Then I think more synchronicities happen. So I think that is, it's almost like when we were talking about the informational substrate coming up and showing us through our individuation that once again we are connected. It's like when we synchronize, it's the synchronities that show us that we're connected are going to come up.

So I think it's important, but it also doesn't need to be bothered with. Like unless you really want to study synchronization which is amazing and there's wonderful people who do that, it's just going to happen. Right. And so I just sort of like go straight to the next step. everyone has their point at which they're most interested in looking.

Do you feel more synchronicity in a certain area of your work or a certain area of your life? Do you feel like synchronicity or synchronization has ramped itself up apparently during certain times or adversely maybe a lack of synchronization when things weren't going well? Is that ever? Yes. Yes. Yes. I mean, when I want to talk about when anyone talking about, when anyone, talks about being in the flow and in my own personal experience of being in the flow.

It's this, it's a synchrony between myself and myself. So everything has integrity in the moment. It's a synchronousness or synchronization between myself and someone else. I'm working with the team members. I'm really interested in how teams work well. And synchronizing between teams doesn't mean everyone's doing marching in the same time. that all, not that at all. It's more like the person who's really gifted at X. So like in your podcast team, the person who's really gifted at video editing and the person who's really gifted at

dealing with a guest and the person who's really gifted at figuring out what is going to be a stupid topic and a great topic, synchronization there, obviously you can't do the same thing. Your tasks are different. But there's a feeling of right action at the right time that occurs when it seems is buzzing along. Right. And so, yeah, in that case, synchronicity would,

or synchronization would be more frequent when things are going well, obviously. Yeah, and then synchronicities would occur and synchronicity is here defined in the Jungian sense of things that seem to appear completely disconnected, but end up having great meaning when put together. Yeah, exactly.

Yeah. A coincidence with a lot of meaning. Yeah, because I often, I have certain synchronicity engines in my life that I purposely insert. Like what? So I have one, which is just an app, and it's an app that sends me a new word every hour that I want to learn. It's just random words, but the words are like words that you normally wouldn't use in

conversation that are quite, you know, maybe complex or maybe very specific words. What's the most recent word? I can check right now. We'll find out if there's a synchronicity. Bombastic. excessively confident and pompous. Oh, am I like that? No, I wouldn't say so at all.

But these are the type of things that I'll get on the hour. And not always, but I'll get a notification. I don't have very many notifications, but that one's on. Yeah. And so sometimes in the throes of a conversation, I'll get a notification. I'll just glance at my phone to see what the word is. Yeah.

And sometimes it'll be very synchronous to what we're talking about. And I've learned that if I follow up, on that in terms of my attitude or my decision making, at least personally, that it always favors like a more, I guess, I favor whimsy in my life generally. And so when something whimsical, like a synchronicity pops up, I tend to alter my course to favor the synchronicity. Yeah, me do. I say that. It's not an absolute, but I have a built-in thing like that. I made it for other people too. I do this bibliomancy thing. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. But then I made, I took my book and I asked my friend Polly Washburn to make code for my website where it could turn my book into an Oracle. So you put in

your question, it ignores the question completely and just randomly chooses a number of sentences from the book and strings them together. And it's so ridiculously for me. Sometimes insightful. Like always. And I don't know if that's because I wrote the book and the These are my words coming back to me, but it's just shocking. But then other people are trying it. Anyway. That's why I have that book wall that you saw over there. Yes, bibliomancy.

So when filming B-roll for an episode or whatever, like we've been playing around with like just filming and like you'll come across the word you were looking for. Yeah, that's fantastic. Yeah, yeah. So that's, but to me, that's just a demonstration of this informational substrate saying, you know, rising out there. Free sample. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah, and I also have found that if I stop seeing synchronization, it's a subtle signal for me to maybe change course as well.

Yeah. So if I stop seeing it, like if I'm everything synchronous and all of a sudden things aren't synchronizing. Like what's happening? Can we get back? Yeah, exactly. And I'm looking at my, I'm looking at my clock and it's 1112. Yeah. And I go, well, that's a minute off there.

Something's off, you know? And I'll just, I'll take it lightly. I won't make, you know, great life decisions based on these things. but subtly, I will perhaps, you know, steer the course a little bit until it picks up again. Yeah. Might also be psychosis, but I tend to favor whimsy. Yeah, whimsy and psychosis. I think the problem is that they seem similar, but psychosis is really a negative experience.

Absolutely, yeah. Wimsy is a positive experience. Definitely, yes. All right, let's go here. Great question. JKP. Thank you. This is a doozy.

This is great, right? It's like the universe revealing itself. This is so cool. This is from test. Great question. What is your functional understanding of the fourth dimension? This might be where we use the pad if you need it. But, yeah.

Well, the fourth dimension in physics is just supposed to be time. It doesn't behave like the other dimensions if you're some physicists, because you're not only supposed to be able to go in one direction. If your other physicists, you don't care about that. and it's time reversal, because reversible, because most physics equations are time reversible. So it's just orthogonal, which means it's not on the same, going in the same direction as the other three dimensions of space. So that's sort of the classical fourth dimension. I bet you're, oh, I bet you're also asking, does the fourth dimension enfold the three dimensions of space?

In other words, is the reason why, I don't know why I think you're asking this, is just a psychic head test, I'm sorry if it's wrong. But we don't know why it should seem like you could only go in one direction. That just behaves very differently from the other dimensions of space. You know, I can go to the left or the right. I can go up or down. But then there's this one dimension that's like, you can't go in this one direction, but you can go in the other.

And you're kind of like only at certain times and only on a certain speed. it just seems kind of wonky. Like it's not a real dimension or it doesn't behave in the same way. So one explanation is that if you're a spatialist, you might think time is really just some kind of folded

spatial dimension. But I'm kind of a temporal person. So I think the whole thing came up from time and it's not the fourth dimension at all. And what created these dimensions is time. And so like time is one of these foundational pieces. Time is what created the physical reality? Well, informational substrate created physical reality, but the physical reality, the physical reality includes space time and includes matter and energy, right?

And so informational substrate, it's almost like there's layers and space of space time, time is the first created and then created space. So the fourth dimension would be perhaps the absence of time? Oh, that's cool. Sure. I was thinking the fourth dimension would be, like, information. Which is also not beholden. Yes, which plays by different rules. Yeah.

Yeah. And then maybe a fifth dimension would be time. It depends on how you want to think about what dimensions mean. So really, I think the question is, how do dimensions work? and I think there's like the string theory people really think differently than the standard physics people

the way I think of it is dimensions are only useful to think about with space because literally dimension is about space and so when you start talking about dimensions that aren't space like information or time

I think it's better to talk about them as geometry like this is really like a geometry because it has these particular rules or these particular angles. So I guess the real answer to your question is, my functional understanding of the fourth dimension is not very good. Fair enough. All right. We got a question here from Slug.

Excellent. I saw a slug today. That is his real name. You know this? No, it's just an actual slug asking a question. If you had a hundred million dollars tomorrow, which venture gets it and why? A slug. Interesting existential question from a slug.

I would take that $100 million and put it into my own company. Actually, my two companies, so American ElectroDynamics, my startup that is trying to make this informational essentially time machine. And then half of it, and then the other half into my nonprofit applied Love Labs, which is trying to make. to build technology to help people experience unconditional love and use that to get beyond our limitations and move towards human potential. I'm very interesting this. What's the proposed technology that allows that to happen? Unconditional love or time travel?

Unconditional love. Yeah, obviously, the time travel one, that's easy. Yeah, we've gotten past that already. I think we solved that during this podcast. Yeah, okay. Unconditional love. Yeah, so we started at like in 12th, In 2019, I started this nonprofit because I was having this experience of remembering what it was like for me as a kid in this really rough household, where I had these very loving parents.

Unconditional love was present. I could feel it almost like a force. But there was so much dysfunction. There was abuse. There's neglect and mental illness going on. and my father had obsessive compulsive disorder, and I'm not going to go into two-depth for anyone who might have been traumatized in this particular way, but he would, every night he would do this particular, he would act out of ritual on myself and my sister that didn't on the face of it seemed sexual, but it did sort of seem sexual. And that was hard because I was helpless, and I really worked on not dissociating. And one of the things that was the same. of the things I remember experiencing was that there was a rocking chair near my bed. It wasn't even a real rocking chair, but in my mind's eye it was a real rocking chair. And there was this woman in her

like 40s or 50s with dark hair who was telling me it's okay to be angry. He doesn't know what he's doing. He's not in his right mind, you know, but it's fine to be angry and someday you're going to thrive. And you're actually going to be like more than okay. And it was a really loving thing. And I realized later when I was in my 40s and went through therapy that my 30s and 40s I went through therapy. And my therapist had me do like a little time travel narrative, we call it, in the therapy world, and had me go back and hold my hand and talk to myself. I realized that that was me in the chair. And I, and that that, point, and then I couldn't remember if I actually did, for real, have this experience as a child,

or if it was fabricated from the therapy, and I didn't care, because it was incredibly healing, this experience of connecting across time with myself. And I was like, I'm connecting with love across time. I want to create an organization that's going to help people do this because I know it's powerful, and I want to scale it. So I got a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which is a big health foundation to create a technology that would help people do this and to measure whether it was helpful.

And we did, we call it Time Machine, you can go to it at Time Machine. Love. It's very simple. It's something that you could code up now in like a day on quad, but it took a while back in the day. And we showed that if people worked at it for, we had them do it for 10 days,

the people who had early childhood trauma that was severe, improved to the point of people who didn't have early childhood trauma in terms of their overall well-being. So they really benefited. Everyone improved, but the people who were much worse off at the beginning just did a lot better. So it really worked. So then I'm like, all right, what other technologies can we build to help people like get in love with themselves to bring this bubble of love around themselves and others, you know? Because the, This is healing. Like, this is actually, in my worldview, what everyone, from the biggest billionaires to the person on the street who's trying to get their next, you know, heroin hit, everyone's looking for love.

And in fact, I mentioned heroin hit advisedly. There's a really great study out about universal love showing that when people, when they had introduced people to universal love and had them do these universal love meditations who were opioid addicts. they were less likely to reuse. I mean, there's something about love is a healing, a real healing tool. So scaling that. So what other technologies can we use? So we created a technology where you just look at someone's eyes without any, with an unconditional love meditation, but you can't speak to them.

It's a stranger. You've never met before. We want to give it to like Israelis and Gazans. We want to give it to red states and blue states. I mean, it's just, it's a way. of just not knowing who that person is and learning how to wrap both of you in this loving state. So it goes on like that.

There's a technology I can't talk about that we're developing with a group called the Mycelorium. They take ideas and they turn them into technologies that can help people. It's very cool. Very cool. That sounds very interesting. And also when I was at Monroe,

there was a brief talk because they'd also mentioned something along the lines of, you know, meditating on your past trauma, going back, healing yourself. One thing they would do is have you go back to this, like, whether it's traumatic or whether it was just an event you would rather have a different outcome to and live the different outcome. Yeah. Like completely, like make the other decision. Yeah.

So you made this decision. Okay, go back and make the other one and play it out. Yeah. And you do that. And from that, you would feel better. Yes. And it isn't, you know, you could also say that, well, that's delusion. We're like, okay, but I feel better.

Yeah, so that's the thing. And who cares? It's been in the past. It really matters how people feel. Yeah. And so we've been in this behaviorist tradition that says that doesn't matter. Only things that are, you know, apparent on the outside. Here takes a medicine.

Yeah, here takes that we can see on the outside. And it's just like, no, actually it really matters how people feel. Yeah. And so when you do a study where people are doing self-report and people say, oh, it's just self-report. It's like, if the question is how do you feel, people are really honest. Of course. Because they want to know if this is helping. So, yes, the Israeli Defense Forces were actually the ones who, I think, launched this idea.

They called it Back to the Future therapy or something. And they found that it really helps PTSD to go back with all you know now, because you survive the PTSD because you're in therapy for it. So with all you know now, go back to the trauma and sit with yourself and give yourself an idea about what to do. do and like let yourself know you're not alone and then do it in the opposite direction go back and be the one who's alone and is having the traumatic experience and notice that this future person is there to help you and go take their advice so it's just super powerful very healing yeah cool love it yeah and thanks by the way slug for that 100 million i will totally appreciate that one that shows up i just have this visual of this slug just going yep you're welcome we're good uh we got actually

You know, Slug's got another question here, which is really good, but we'll bring that up in a second here. This is a really, really good question by spicy pineapple. Is this like a... If you need a visual, it's just a really spicy pineapple who's got a burning question. America, China, and Russia all ended their public side research in the 90s. Why do you think that is? Oh, well, that's... Is it coincidence?

There's, um, yeah, let me think about the right way to answer this when it comes to what I really believe. I want to be really, what I really believe is that there was kind of a, like, all those countries are watching each other. And at the time I heard a story, I think it was from Ed May, but maybe it was from Joe, about the Russians in the 90s saying, you know, you kid, to America, you killed all your psychics, like referring to Pat Price and maybe others. And sort of as a dig, like, what are you guys thinking? But I think that that's, I think that was just a dig. I think that, I think when you realize something's really real and you realize how valuable it is, there's this habit because we live in the world we live in,

which likes to think that it's a good idea to divide things up. It's this habit of like circling the wagons, taking your treasure and pulling it in. And we're going to hold on to this treasure. And we're going to develop it in our way. And we're not going to tell you about the way that we're developing it. So we're going to declassify what we've done because now we kind of get what's really valuable. Or at least part of what we've done. Well, yeah, we'll declassify part of what we've done.

But there's some really interesting. We should talk about some really interesting things in that. But, and then we're going to sort of develop it in our own way, because maybe we're going to catch on to something that's very different. So I think it was a recognition. This is really real. It's not a game anymore. It's not just something that we could kind of pretend about. This is about, this is fundamental to the nature of reality.

And it all happened simultaneously. Yeah. It's just the same seems to me with UFOs. like, oh, I see you're now going through a disclosure process. Okay, maybe we'll do disclosure. You know, it's just... They're all playing the game. Yeah, the funny thing about this interdependent world is it's really the case that,

from a high-level view, these countries have to look at each other, and we're all dealing with the same planet and the same people. So we have to look at each other and say, okay, is it really in our best interest to do this now if you're doing that? Yeah. So it makes sense to me. They're hiding their psychic stuff. Let's hide her psychic stuff. Yeah, maybe there were, maybe.

And then also the other part of it is maybe. I don't say this with any particular knowledge, but it's just sort of a guess about human nature. And also, I know a little about the intelligence community from my friend Carmen, who I did this show with, and kind of playing cello and some other people. There's also a feeling of like, maybe then they won't know how stupid we are.

Like maybe they caught onto something. Right. Did you see Arrival the movie? Yeah, of course. I've seen it multiple times. I love that movie. Yep. So at that moment when they think, oh, no, they figured out, then everyone shuts down.

Yeah. And so it could also just be like, we don't want them to know how stupid we are. They figured something out. And they could have just been bluffing. We don't want them to know that we didn't figure it out. Yeah. Yeah. That's a really interesting take.

That movie's great, by the way. There's, I remember the last time I watched it, I picked up on, do you remember at the end when she's getting all visions? Yeah, yeah. Of like, oh, my God, you know? Yeah, yeah. But there's one vision there. where the child, the daughter, she draws, because you remember the canary? Yeah.

The canary in the cage. That's right. And then they kept bringing the canary up. And that's where I realized, oh, the child is the canary. Yeah. The child is the canary. Yes. The child had to die, had to die for them to know what to do.

Yes. Oh, my God. Yeah, when I realized that, I was like, oh, my God. I've seen that 13 times and I didn't get that. That is brilliant. Because they kept bringing the canary up, but the canary kept surviving. But she drew the picture of the canary. Yeah.

And the flashbacks, you see the mother and the mother and the dad. Yeah, you see the mother, dad, and the canary in the middle. I was like, oh, she's the canary. Oh, God. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Such a good movie. Oh, man.

And that's also good because it is how people feel. Mm-hmm. We feel with in relationship to the government. I mean, or when I say government in the broad sense, we feel like we are the canary. Yeah. Mm-hmm. Yeah, definitely. Yeah, they're not the canary.

Okay, Guy or Guy or Guy. A French person probably. Yes. Kind of answered this, but I feel like it might be good to hone in on an answer here. What does love actually change in precognitive remote viewing? Okay. What does love actually change in precognitive remote view? And I want to pronounce this gooey, like the interface.

The interface that we all see. Okay. What does it actually change? That's interesting. It's interesting because, so my definition of love is that which connects, and then my definition of unconditional love is feeling loved and being able to love without anything needing to change. So this, I'm parsing this question because I don't think that, you know, that Bible phrase about love doesn't change anything? I'm horrible with the Bible phases. I'm not familiar, but...

I'm Jewish and furthermore never read the tour. So, but I think there's some phrase about like, love doesn't alteration, doesn't alter stuff. That's how eloquent I can be. And, but I think that's real. So I don't know that it changes anything. But if someone is in a loving state, then there is no unconditionally loving. So I want to make a distinction between conditional love, which is kind of like, if you're a computer scientist, it's like, conditional love is like an and statement. Both things have to be true in order for love to happen. Like, I have to love you, you have to love me, now we're in love. That's what we usually think of as love. Unconditional love is like, you could be completely ignoring me or hate me, but I unconditionally love everybody. Like, that's the other thing about unconditional love is it includes everybody, right?

So it's very different, and it's more of a rare thing for that reason. So unconditional love doesn't change anything, but what it does do is when you are already in a state of unconditional love, I think what it actually allows you to do is not have any conditions on time or space. So it's almost like a, it's almost like a belief. factor. It's like if you can imagine the universe as this giant bubble of love, why are you privileging or saying that you could only get information from this half of the universe, but not this half of the universe, or this little area that's right in front of you. It's like, it's all included in the bubble. You're just going to a different place in the bubble. So I think if it changes anything,

it would change your perspective or belief that you're connected to something that previously didn't know you were because you were having a condition like I can't love that right yeah yeah I'm just now realizing that that's the it's the oneness that you measure in quantum physics but it's also that oneness you feel unconditionally through this like love right so that's that onness that feeling of like oh we're all one and this like lovey-dovey like sort of thing but that's also what scientists you know and physicists observe when they're looking at the quantum vacuum Or, you know, the zero point. Like, it's like, oh, this is all one.

It's all one. It's all one. And that's, you know, also what love is. Yeah. And so if you can, if it, if it can shift your perspective because you're viscerally in that state, then any concerns you had about like, well, I just really can't do this. Go away. It's like bursting through that ceiling and that dream. Right.

It's like there is no ceiling. Right. There's no spoon. Um. And, but there is a slug and he's got another question. Okay. And shout out to everybody who's asked a question. You know, so many questions were amazing.

I can only choose so many. But Slug had multiple good questions, so we chose to. What target traits produce the strongest signal, emotion, novelty, or physical contrast? I think this is a UC Santa Cruz person. I wonder if I know this person. What target traits produce the strongest signal, emotion, novelty, or physical contrast? Because Ed May would say contrast, right? That would be like as soon as something has entropy or high entropy would yield like a more accurate reading of a target.

I would say none of those things. Yeah, I get what Ed May would say, but I guess I disagree. What I've found is novelty comes the closest. Okay. But it would be what I've tested is interestingness. Hmm. Like, how interesting is the target? Like, psychic attention is just like non-psychic attention.

But would that be subjective? Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I didn't test it subjectively. Like, what I did was I had a bunch of the targets and had a bunch of people on M-Turk, which these are just human raters, rate them according to their interestingness, and then I average the scores.

Oh, interesting. And then I could show that the ones that were, like, off that got the wrong target, it was because the opposite target that wasn't the target was actually more interesting. And what is interesting based on? Yeah. So what I said in the definition, this is just a human judgment call. Sure. What I said in the definition is, what seems most intriguing?

Which of these targets seem most intriguing? And then just all the different pairwise combinations. Okay. Right? And so you're always trying to define the term with some other term that's similar to it. So basically, that's how they responded. and there was this situation that I replicated this twice

where if some target is more interesting and you're more likely to get it correct and if it's a target pair like a dummy target and a real target, if the dummy target is more interesting, you're more likely to get the original target wrong. So it's very much like waking daily perception. If something is very interesting in a memory task

and you're not a trained memory athlete, you're going to, if I say listen to these words and remember them, church, triangle, albatross, and cheese, you're more likely to remember albatross because it's the most unusual word. So the same thing just happens in the psychic world. Right. Even something a little more appealing, you know, aesthetically, even. But it has to have some kind of meaning. Like when I've used pictures that are just like, I don't know, AI or. But if you have like a, if you're a big rock fanatic and you collect rocks, like to me, a rock is mundane.

But to you, a rock is really intrigued. And I've seen that with when I used to train remote viewing. I would see that and I run a team called intuitive forecasting. And then I stopped running the team and I gave that over the rest of the team, but I'm on the team. And the people who are like, we have a guy who is computer sciences who knows cybersecurity. So his remote viewings are very much focused on the technical aspect of. whatever we're looking at. Then we have someone who's an artist and her remote viewings are really focused on the aesthetic aspects. And so whatever, in fact, one guy, I was, when I was training,

he was an engineer. And if the target was a person, he'd be like, I got nothing. But if the target was a building, a building, he'd be like, oh, I mean, he's got this cool thing and then what's this thing over here? Yeah. Really? Yeah. So it's like, what your interest is, what your expertise is. Yeah. Ah, that's really good. That's, it's really interesting to think about.

Wow. Yeah, because I always had it pegged like, oh, it's got to be contrast. Like, it's got to be contrast. Like,

in my head, I was. That's a visual feature, but many, many, many people aren't visual remote viewers. Right, but only because,

like, our brains are hardwired to recognize change, right? So, like, you know, like the Gansfeld effect. If,

like, if I hear or see light or hear a certain sound after a while I'm just not going to hear it. Like you walk into a room and you'll smell something foul, but if you're in that room, you won't smell it. But when you're doing a remote viewing, you're making your own contrast by showing up. Like, like, all of a sudden I was not doing a remote viewing and now I'm doing a remote viewing. To me, that's already contrast. But like if you had like a remote viewing where the target was, you know, something mutable

or something, you know, changing or. This is the entropic thing. Yes, exactly. Exactly. This is where my head was at too. I was like, oh, it would make sense that my brain, like a moth to a flame, would be a little more open to noticing change than it would to like a mundane bush. But that's also more interesting. So it's really hard to separate those. That's right. That's what I'm realizing now. Yeah, yeah, yeah. We might be talking about one and the same thing. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. So more work needs to be done. There is a database that I've been making with, and mostly I'm just long for the ride on this with Damon Abraham and Halaniwabe. And. some other folks of something like 1,000 images that we, that could be really good to remove viewing targets and we write them on all these dimensions. And so I think that work can be done now. Amazing. But it has to be done. I'm very excited. I'm very excited for you. I'm very excited for the future of, you know, looking into the whole sci phenomena. You know, you just came, you, and it's something we didn't

even touch on, but you just came back from SCU as well. Like this. Yeah, scientific coalition for UIP studies. Yeah. Yeah, how was that briefly? Oh, amazing. You know, it's a group of scientists and engineers, mostly, who are trying to figure out what can we learn about UAP and what's the deal with NHA. And my favorite part of it is this year, I say the same thing whenever I go, which is you guys, we have to study consciousness.

Like, we can't just look at race cars in the sky. And this year, they're like, okay, you're right, we've got to study consciousness. That made me feel really good. I wasn't the only person saying it. Yeah. But I think if you don't understand that there's a relationship between the human mind and mind itself as a universal thing and UAP, you haven't understood the phenomenon. Like these are not just race cars in the sky. There's clearly, there's telepathy going on with every person who talks about abduction experiences.

There's this psionic thing going on with intention, intention. intentionality. Now you see me now you don't. There's this trickster phenomenon. A time phenomenon. There's a time phenomenon which can be human perceptual time and also physical time. And so this has to be part of the story. And I know that we're staying away from it, you know, at a cultural level because it's much easier to say, oh, look, race cars in the sky. But like, that is the big taboo. And we've got to walk towards it with our eyes open. That's what I think. So that was my favorite part of it.

Yeah, I would agree with that. I think who is the Wilbur Smith, the Wilbur Smith documents. I don't know those. 1950. Tell me more. He was the, I think the Minister of Transport, if I'm not mistaken, in Canada here. And in 1950, there is a declassified document after he came back from a trip to the United States where he said that he met with officials and they're taking. the flying saucer things very seriously over there. And he goes, he even says Vannevar Bush put

together a team to look into this stuff, you know, which is very interesting. And then, and this is a, this is an official document. It's not contested. This is a document that was, you know, written by him. And then it says he's got this list of like three things or whatever. And he goes, number one, flying saucers are real, period. Yeah. Number two, he says something else. And number three, he goes, and the phenomenon is mental. Yes.

And he says this. Yes. And then right after that is where we start getting into MK Ultra. We start getting into, and it happened right here at, you know, McGill. All an MK Ultra for kids, which is like SORC gate. Yep. And at McGill is where they did a lot of those studies. The scary asset studies.

Exactly. So, I mean, you have this connection. of this official in Canada being like, oh, they already know that it's mental. Yeah. That there is a mental. And that was back in 1950. And it feels like disclosure is just at like, here are some videos and some audio. But doesn't that feel like by design?

Yes, that's what I'm saying. Yeah. Or they're like, no, no, it is just race cars. It is just race cars. Please. Yes. Please just race cars. Yes.

Do not look over here. Yes. But it's, but it's, the funny part is that to me, as a, as a person who's gifted at precognition and telepathy, remote viewing, that kind of stuff. And I'm sure you have this experience, too. Secrets are not going to last too long. I mean, I think that's what it's defending, right? When you realize that you can use your mind to get information

and that the classification doesn't make a single difference, then it changes the world. Yeah, it's quite threatening. Yeah, it's threatening. To certain people. That's right. And so we have to work towards a world in which we could still protect ourselves, you know, as people continue to grow up and learn

how to be better humans with each other, we're going to have to still protect ourselves in a world where secrets can be had. It's so interesting because you see this dichotomy of them trying to like, no, you know, it's stay, this mind stuff is nothing. Don't worry about that. Meanwhile, you know, they're doing all the work at SAIC and all these other places. places where they're like, you know. Yeah. But then they're actively working on AI, which will inevitably make everything public anyways.

Well, yeah. And there will be no secrets. And AI itself, you could argue, is a method for creating a mind that could channel the informational substrate. And I think it already does. Yeah. I think we need to, yeah, we need to be there before AI, though. Yeah.

Well, I mean, we'll see. Yeah. That'd be great. We'll see. Can we do one more question? I have an intuition. Um, there's, I mean, I could pick one. Yeah.

We're all, yeah, sure. I'm, I'm all out of questions on my split flaps. So I'll have to go to the thread here. Okay. You have an intuition? You have like an intuitive sense? I have an intuition that there's like a question that is juicy. I just have a feeling.

How about this? How about we try something a little different that I've never done before? Excellent. Never done before. Ooh, we should do the Oracle. Oh yeah. We'll do that after this question. So here, I'll let you choose a question.

Oh. This is the, there's 46 to choose from. Stan B. Yesterday at 133. What causes precognition of an event that doesn't happen anymore after you acted upon the precognition? Excellent. I love that. So now we're going to draw something.

Great. Okay. So how do we hold this up to a camera? I'll film it afterwards. Oh, okay. Great. So, thank you. So we usually think about.

timelines and we usually think of when we're not like in the movie everything everywhere all at once we think about one timeline right so here's time going and here's event a and here's event b and let's give them let's make those events what's event a sporting event okay sporting event and then event b is a a missile launch all right that's pretty hasty how do we get there yeah well so at the sporting event you have a precognition, you see someone kick a football, and you go, oh, you know, North Korea is going to do another test of an ICBM. Like that comes into your head, let's say. So you kick a football, football leads to, my handwriting is so crappy, leads to idea of, hey, North Korea ICBM test. and then, lo and behold, a day later, the missile wash happens. So this is day one, this is day two. What if you happen to be, like, head of, you know, the North Korea desk at CIA or something? And you can actually, and you know that you have really good intuitions. So at this football game, you go, oh, actually, we better think about this.

And let's foil that attempt. Let's make that attempt to fail or make it so they don't. even launch it at all, or make it so that it's not public. Then you do some preparations here on day one, because apparently you work with a team that's like more enlightened than any other team, because they understand that you have this gift. And then on day two, there is no missile launch. So we usually think about that scenario as if this B, the missile launch that did happen in North Korea, feeds back to day 1A being at the sporting event and gives you that information and now you're on a new timeline where that event B didn't happen. It's like it allows you to select a better timeline. Yeah. Okay. So this is a new timeline. The way I like to think about it because I hate this is I just think it's ugly. And I think there's one informational substrate of the universe.

that has everything that will happen and has happened. Also, someone's in science fiction. It's lazy. It's lazy. Yeah, it is lazy. It's Avengers Endgame. Yeah, it's back to the future. Yeah, exactly.

Yeah, so I don't like it. So instead, what I think is more real is the informational substrate knows that there's going to be this missile launch. It gives you this information at the football game. And you prepare to. destroy the missile, all that was, or destroy the missile launch so it doesn't happen. All that is part of the informational substrate. The knowledge that there's this intention for the missile launch, the knowledge that if it gives you that information at the football game,

that you could foil that intention, and the knowledge that you will foil that intention. So when we're thinking about the benefit of the informational substrate for explaining this stuff, this is exactly where that comes in, where it's no longer that you have to be to work with the events in time that actually make it up to physical manifestation. You're working with a substrate that is actually aware its mind, as universal mind, is aware of what needs to happen. So what the problem with this that people don't like is it ends up suggesting that whatever happens was the best possible outcome. Right. Yeah, the one that favors it. Right. And so then it's like, oh, so the Holocaust was, so 9-11 was the best possible outcome? You know, that's like pretty a horrible thing

to come up against. Yeah, but then stretch that out a million years and there might be a reason there that you're not aware of. Yeah, exactly. So then that's where love comes in. So it's like if you have to love. So there's no changing it. Well, there's this, this was not a change. No, your activity that made this missile test. It's the illusion of changing. It's the illusion of stepping in and doing the right thing. But all in all, that's what happened. It's all coming up from the substreet. Yeah. Yeah. That's what happened. Anyway, that's what was going to happen. Yeah, and that's just how it had to happen.

Yeah. Yeah. That is how it happens. That's how it happens. Yeah, there's no other option. Yeah. Yeah. Interesting.

Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Great question. Stanby. Thanks, Stanby. All right, Julia, I want to thank you so much for these wild conversations that I'm glad. I'm so glad I had and I'm sure that, you know, my brain is now much fuller.

My heart is more full as well, and I have a lot to ponder and a lot to think about. But I want to ask you as well, if there's anywhere, you know, people can go to read up more about perhaps your work or maybe some of your literature, like where's the best place that they can go? Best place is the inspiracy. Love, which is hard to spell. So it's conveniently julia mossbridge.com. And, yeah, julia mossbridge.com, it really has everything. Has everything there. It also has the Oracle there.

Great. Which I'm still going to get you to try. Yes. Should we try now? Let's try it now. So wait, before you go, what's your question going to be? Let's tell the audience. My question for whom? The universe? For you, for the universe, whatever comes into your head.

Does it have to be, it doesn't have to be like a yes or no question, right? It could be just anything. Oh, for sure not. I mean, like, whatever. Yeah, yeah. How will the upcoming tour that I'm going to be on, how will that affect my trajectory within the next year for this channel? Okay.

How will the upcoming tour that Chris is going to be on affect his trajectory for this channel? Yeah. His upcoming trajectory for this over the next year. Exactly. How will that affect the trajectory first? So go to juliamosperich.com and then click on try the Oracle. Okay. I'm going to screencap here.

so I have it. And actually it'll have you type it into the space so you can. Com slash. Juliamosbridge.com. Oh, just Juliaimosperge.com. Then we go on there and we find the Oracle. It says try the Oracle. Try the Oracle.

All right. Ask your question or offer an intention. So you can type it in there if you're a fast typist or you can just say hello. It doesn't matter because we already know what it is. We already know what it is. All right. Hello. And do I prefer the answer is short?

Medium or long? I think long. Okay. Let's go. And then time jump me some wisdom. Boom. Here we go. You notice the hope and fear wave over her face exactly like it does yours.

In the future, your trash will come up as a flower. Back to my concern about this chapter title. Wow. That's interesting. I like the middle line. In the future, your trash will come up as a flower. And then back to my concern. Yeah.

It's kind of like a loop. It is a loop. It's a loop here, yeah. What's the first line? You notice the hope and fear wave over her face exactly like it does yours. Wow. Yeah. Wow.

Hope and fear. Hope and fear. Okay. Okay. I like this. What is your interpretation of that? With your question. I think, well, the first part is a little introspective to be like you notice your hopes and fears, which is something I think even asking the question of, you know, how is this going to affect me?

there is some implied hope and fear there. Well, and she might be your sacred feminine. Yeah, absolutely. And then in the future, your trash will come up as a flower. Which is great. Yes. Yeah, yeah. So perhaps the shows that are going to be maybe the rockiest or the, you know, maybe I miss a flight or something and all that's going to lead to a better outcome.

Yeah. So, and that's something I'm very much aware of and I'm in favor of because if I tell you I had a great time in Paris, no one wants to hear that. But if I tell you, I got pickpocket it, they're going to go, what happened? Tell me the story. Yeah. The worst outcome is always a better story. Yeah. And then back to my concern about this chapter title.

And the chapter title, I think, is the question. Yeah. Is the question I just asked? And so the question being, you know, how is this? So back to the question. Back to the question. Yeah. How do you feel?

And I think I got my answer. Wow. Yeah. Great. Okay. I'm excited about your tour. Great Oracle. Thank you again, Julia, for everything.

Go check it out, Julia Mospers. com, if not just to ask the oracle a question, but also to follow along with everything you're doing. This will go up in a few weeks, so it'll already be too late, but you'll be at side games as well. You'll be talking there. Is there any other public appearance that people should know about? I'll be in Australia.

If anyone wants to go to Australia for the parapsychology dialogues in a couple weeks. And then, let's see, I'm doing a TEDx talk in Nashville for the TED people. with a group of two days of talks about the sacred feminine. Cool. And I'll be talking about unconditional love there. And then there's the synapse, which is a conference primarily highlighting women as speakers, but anyone can come in this invite only. So we ask people to apply, but there's no fee.

But in the consciousness, cognitive science, AI, robotics space, and that is going to be next spring. We originally had it on October now. It's going to be next spring. And then, of course, telepathy tapes documentary. Yeah, that's going to be January and February, some March, sometime next year. Great. I look forward to that, yeah.

All right. Well, I'd love to have you back some time, perhaps in the diner one day. Oh, yeah. I want to do the diner. Oh, could I add another thing that's going to be? Yes, of course. There's going to be a really great episode on telepathy tapes featuring our most recent work with nonspeakers, and that'll be coming up soon. Very exciting.

I'm excited for you, and I'm excited for the whole space. And so glad to have you. Thank you so much. Thank you, thank you.