June 5, 2005 - Art Bell
02:30:39
| 
| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
| Maybe I should have Premier cryogenically freeze my microphone. | ||
| Well, anyway, coming up, William A. Tiller, fellow to the American Academy for the Advancement of Science, Professor Emeritus William A. Tiller of Stanford University's Department of Material Sciences, spent 34 years in academia after nine years as an advisory physicist with Westinghouse Research Labs. | ||
| Wow. | ||
| In his conventional science field, he has published over 250 scientific papers, four books, and several patents. | ||
| In parallel for the past 30 years, he's been pursuing avocationally, that means as a hobby, serious experimental and theoretical study of the field of psychoenergetics, which he thinks will become a very important part of tomorrow's physics in this new area. | ||
| He has published to date an additional 100 scientific papers and three seminal books, Science and Human Transformation, Conscious Acts of Creation, and the newest book, Some Science Adventures with Real Magic. | ||
| Coming right up. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Coming right up. | |
| Just one quick interruption before William Tiller. | ||
| This is Matt. | ||
| Matt is one who wrote to me that Yucca Mountain was on fire. | ||
| Matt, you're in Beatty? | ||
| Beatty, Nevada. | ||
| Matt, is that correct? | ||
| Hello, Matt. | ||
| You there? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yep, I'm here. | |
| Okay, good. | ||
| You're in Beatty, correct? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yep. | |
| What's happening? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, Thursday night lightning storms came through. | |
| Right. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Started the fire up at Yucca. | |
| Okay. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And it's been burning since Thursday night, and it grew today because of the wind. | |
| Right. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And today they set up a staging area at the Old Borough Inn in Beatty for about 200 firefighters, catering, showers. | |
| Trucks are going up north of town where the access road is. | ||
| How high is a Yucca Mountain? | ||
|
unidentified
|
You know, I'm not sure. | |
| How much is there to burn on Yucca Mountain? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, I think there's some pinioned pines once you get up in the higher elevations there. | |
| I've never been to Yucca Mountain, but there is a lot of, you know, growth from the winter when we had all the rain, just like down in Toronto. | ||
| Sure. | ||
| And it's burning out of control right now. | ||
| All right. | ||
| Well, of course, years from now, when all of that stuff is stored there, we don't want to hear about fire, earthquake, or other dis you know. | ||
| Thanks, Matt. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I just hope that the firefighters are safe. | |
| I hope they are. | ||
| And thank you very, very much for the tip. | ||
| So Yulka Mountain virtually on fire. | ||
| And he's right, certainly right, that has not made the news. | ||
| Now our guest, William A. Tiller, welcome, William. | ||
| Welcome to the program. | ||
| Well, thank you. | ||
| I'm looking forward to our joint adventure. | ||
| And I'm sure it will be an adventure, too. | ||
| I don't understand at all what psychoenergetic science even is. | ||
| So that's an obvious starting point. | ||
| Okay, well, let me give you sort of a thumbnail view of that. | ||
| If you look at conventional establishment science, you write yourself a little equation. | ||
| You write mass with arrows going back and forth to energy. | ||
| And pretty much all of conventional science deals with that reaction. | ||
| And Einstein, of course, quantified the relationship between the two a long time ago. | ||
| Stay good and close to the phone for me. | ||
| And the conventional science deals, its reference frame for viewing nature is space-time. | ||
| And relativity theory imposes the limitation that everything must go slower than the velocity of light. | ||
| That's correct. | ||
| So that's conventional. | ||
| And now if you look at psychoenergetics, basically you take those two terms, mass and energy, and you add another one to the right of energy. | ||
| You've got arrows going back and forth to consciousness. | ||
| And you expand the reference frame to include higher dimensional realms, and you remove the restriction of the velocity of light. | ||
| I can see we're going to get along just fine. | ||
| Good. | ||
| So you draw more lines but to consciousness. | ||
| Right. | ||
| Of course, we don't have a good definition of consciousness at any point in time. | ||
| No, we don't. | ||
| But in essence, each of those terms appears to be convertible one to the other. | ||
| We seem to be learning now more about consciousness rather quickly. | ||
| There is a whole raft of experiments that are going on, and you and I am sure we'll talk about them. | ||
| And you have done some experiments of your own, right? | ||
| Absolutely. | ||
| So I want to first hear about your experiments, and then we'll talk about others. | ||
| But I really, really want to hear what you've been doing and how you even decided to try it. | ||
| Okay, well, the place where we started was that there has been an unstated assumption by conventional establishment science, really for the last two paradigms, that is quantum mechanics and classical mechanics. | ||
| And what is held by most scientists is the assumption that no human qualities of consciousness, intention, emotion, mind, or spirit can significantly influence a well-designed target experiment in physical reality. | ||
| So I decided to start there and set out to either prove it right or wrong. | ||
| In what manner? | ||
| The approach we took was the following. | ||
| I started with two simple low-tech electronic devices. | ||
| They're identical to each other. | ||
| You couldn't distinguish one from the other. | ||
| What are they? | ||
| Basically, it has some EEPROM memory element in it, and an oscillator, or more than one oscillator, a few diodes and resistors and capacitors, but very, very low-tech. | ||
| What does it do? | ||
| In a black box. | ||
| Okay, does it actually do anything? | ||
| Yeah, I'll come to that. | ||
| I mean, basically, the total output power of this system is less than one microwatt. | ||
| One millionth of a watt. | ||
| Got it. | ||
| And so that's the starting thing. | ||
| It's in a little black box. | ||
| It's about three inches wide, seven inches long, and an inch thick. | ||
| So just a little black box. | ||
| It's going to kill me not to ask questions. | ||
| No, that's fine. | ||
| All right. | ||
| What kind of energy output is it producing? | ||
| Well, it's electrical energy. | ||
| It's electrical energy. | ||
| That's the start of it. | ||
| AC, DC? | ||
| Well, because you have oscillators, its output is in these oscillators are in the frequency range of 1 to 10 megahertz. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Sure. | ||
| But it's such a low power level. | ||
| It's remarkably low. | ||
| There's no intentional antenna in it. | ||
| Right. | ||
| So what we do is they take one of those and we set it aside as the control device. | ||
| And the other one we set on a tabletop around which four very well-qualified meditators sit. | ||
| And they go into a deep meditative state. | ||
| They cleanse, mentally cleanse the terrain of the tabletop. | ||
| And when things seem right, one of the members states a specific intention for the device. | ||
| The intention would be for the device to influence a particular target experiment, which I'll get to. | ||
| And then the four people hold that intention in their own way for about 15 minutes. | ||
| And then the statement is given, so be it, thy will be done. | ||
| And then there is a subsidiary intention given to seal the primary imprint into the device so that there's no wasteful leakage of the imprint away. | ||
| All right. | ||
| I've got to stop you again. | ||
| The end sentence seems to have religious connotation. | ||
| Now, is that the spiritual connotation? | ||
| But I doubt that it's religious. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| All right. | ||
| Well, let me give you my bias. | ||
| My bias is that we are all spirits having a physical experience as we ride the river of life together. | ||
| And our spiritual parents dressed us in these bio-body suits and put us in this playpen, which we call a universe, in order to grow in coherence, in order to develop our gifts of intentionality. | ||
| Did you say grow in coherence? | ||
| Grow incoherence. | ||
| I'm not sure which way we're going there, but. | ||
| Okay, and to develop our gifts of intentionality and to become what we were intended to become, which is co-creators with our spiritual parents. | ||
| That's my bias. | ||
| Got it. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| So in essence, there are indeed spiritual overtones here. | ||
| But not necessarily specific religious ones at all. | ||
| Not in any way specific religious ones. | ||
| I've got it. | ||
| One last thing. | ||
| These meditators that you had, where'd you get them? | ||
| Well, my wife and I were two of them. | ||
| We've been meditating for 35, 40 years. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| And the other two happened to be friends that we knew were well qualified. | ||
| Good enough. | ||
| Yep. | ||
| All right, so now. | ||
| And then basically we would come out of meditation and we would pass it around and see what it felt like, to see if it felt as if it was cooked enough. | ||
| And by and large, we generally went back in and did it a second time, but we've never done it more than a second time. | ||
| All right. | ||
| And so then we did an experiment in which we set these two devices, the control and the imprinted device. | ||
| So we'll call them the unimprinted and the imprinted. | ||
| We set them about 100 meters apart, and we turned them off electrically. | ||
| And we noted, we left them that way for a number of days. | ||
| We noted that in less than a week, the imprint had somehow transferred from the IIED, we call that an intention imprinted electrical device, to the UED, the unimprinted device. | ||
| Are you telling me that information that was in an EEPROM in one of your devices transferred into the EEPROM of a second device? | ||
| That's what we infer from the results. | ||
| God, good Lord, how can that... | ||
| But the issue is it indicated that there was another information channel available in the universe that we knew nothing about. | ||
| It certainly was not electromagnetic, and that'll become very clear. | ||
| Well, okay, right away, that's what I want to know about. | ||
| How can you be sure that what you have not built is a receiver and transmitter capable of some kind of direct transmission? | ||
| Well, it was turned off electrically. | ||
| There's no electrical power. | ||
| Yes, but they were on during the intent portion of the program. | ||
| It was on during the intent imprinting, exactly. | ||
| And then we turned them off. | ||
| Now, was there an original program in the main one? | ||
| No program. | ||
| Oh, so there's no program. | ||
| Both EEPROMs are empty. | ||
| Yeah, both empty. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Oh, okay. | |
| I'm getting it. | ||
| There's nothing placed intentionally in the system. | ||
| Got it. | ||
| Got it. | ||
| And then what we, well, then our concern was, well, how the heck are we going to do experiments with these? | ||
| Well, we realized that electromagnetism was secondarily involved, so we ended up, we placed the control device in a small electrically grounded Faraday cage, and we took the imprinted device and we wrapped it in aluminum foil and we put it in an electrically grounded Faraday cage. | ||
| And in this way, we were able to maintain The imprint in the device for the order of three to four months. | ||
| Holy mackerel. | ||
| Which meant that we could then do experiments. | ||
| And now you're going to tell me that despite the Faraday's shielding. | ||
| Oh, we could take them out. | ||
| We basically would take them out and ship them. | ||
| We'd send them by FedEx to a laboratory 1,500 miles away where the target experiments were set up. | ||
| Wow. | ||
| And so that's sort of how we did it. | ||
| We didn't send the unimprinted device at the same time as the imprinted device because we wanted to minimize any kind of information transfer. | ||
| And then when they got, it was up in Minnesota, and when they got there, they were placed immediately in separate electrically grounded Faraday cages until we were ready to run the experiment. | ||
| Holy mackerel. | ||
| So that's step one. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Well, why don't I tell you what the target experiments were and what we found? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Please. | |
| Okay. | ||
| There were four target experiments, and one target experiment means one of these devices, okay? | ||
| Because you only have one imprint. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| So the first one was to take highly purified water in equilibrium with air, and the imprint intention was to increase the pH of the water by one full pH unit. | ||
| Now, in terms of how big is one pH unit, that's a factor of 10 of the hydrogen ion concentration. | ||
| But if you take a human body, we all have a pH level in us. | ||
| If you move a half a pH point on one side, that is you go up, let's say, you're probably dead. | ||
| If you go half a unit the other way, you're probably dead. | ||
| So that's a lot. | ||
| It's a lot. | ||
| That's the point. | ||
| And it's in equilibrium with air, and so that means that the pH of the water becomes largely determined by the carbon dioxide concentration of the air. | ||
| That was target experiment one. | ||
| Target experiment two was to take the same water, and the imprint intention was to lower the pH by one full pH unit. | ||
| Our measurement accuracy was one one hundredth of a pH unit. | ||
| So we were asking for a signal that was 100 times the noise. | ||
| That's a lot to ask for. | ||
| That's a lot to ask for. | ||
| The third experiment was we moved into the biological realm and we took a particular liver enzyme, alkaline phosphatase. | ||
| Now, I know that I shouldn't have to stop you really and ask you this, but I can't resist. | ||
| You're telling me you did this. | ||
| We're not just. | ||
| We did this and it was remarkably successful. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Repeatably. | ||
| Well, we'll come to the replication experiment. | ||
| After we go through what we discovered with these. | ||
| I mean, replication is always a replication by others and other sites is always an important part of a piece of scientific work. | ||
| We replicated it many, many, many times ourselves. | ||
| Okay, the first three years of experiments, we did all these things ourselves. | ||
| And it was only then that we started the external site experiments. | ||
| We found some money to do that. | ||
| Good for you. | ||
| You didn't stick your neck out until you were sure it wasn't going to get chopped off. | ||
| Right, right. | ||
| I mean, it's that, that's, we do the science in the same way as you do conventional science. | ||
| It's just a little, well, we'll see that it's a little more difficult than conventional science because of consciousness being involved. | ||
| And then, so the third one was this increasing of the thermodynamic activity of a particular liver enzyme, alkaline phosphatase. | ||
| And we were successful with that to about 20%, 25%. | ||
| And then the fourth target experiment was to move to a simple living system, which were fruit fly larvae. | ||
| And the intention statement there was to increase the ATP ratio to the ADP in the cells of fruit fly larvae. | ||
| I don't know what that is. | ||
| ATP is the energy storage molecule that is present in all living systems, the cells of all living systems. | ||
| And the ADP is the precursor molecule. | ||
| So you have to add three of the key molecules instead of two, and then it becomes a stable group, and that's the energy storage unit. | ||
| So you were using those as a marker and trying to what, increase them? | ||
| To increase the ATP to ADP, which means that the larva would have more inherent energy, and therefore it would take less time for them to develop to the adult fly stage. | ||
| And you're successful percentage? | ||
| We were successful to the order of 15, 20% in the ATP to ADP, and we were able to reduce the larval development time to the adult fly stage by 25%. | ||
| Oh, all of this is a gigantic wow. | ||
| Yeah, and all of these things we used in the latter two, the biological ones, we had four treatments side by side under the same temperature, the same humidity. | ||
| One treatment would be out in the air. | ||
| The second would be the same thing inside the Faraday cage. | ||
| The third would be the same thing inside the Faraday cage, but the unimprinted device turned on. | ||
| and the fourth would be the same in the Faraday cage when the imprinted device turned on. | ||
| Music Perhaps I should remind you again who you're listening to. | ||
| Fellow to the American Academy for the Advancement of Science, Professor Emeritus William A. Tiller of Stanford University's Department of Materials Science has spent 34 years in academia after nine years as an advisory physicist with the Westinghouse Research Labs. | ||
| That's who you're listening to. | ||
| The subject, obviously, is consciousness, and the professor has done some experiments that should Rattle academia. | ||
| I mean, seriously, rattle academia. | ||
| I understand, and I hope most of you do, what he's achieved. | ||
| If not, we'll back up just a little bit and try and lay it out again so that you understand the significance of what you're hearing. | ||
| Professor, you made just a couple of small electronic devices with some EEPROMs, an EEPROM in each one, and some other apparatus, but nothing communicative. | ||
| In other words, these devices didn't in any way talk to each other. | ||
| Nothing like modern electronics. | ||
| Right. | ||
| And then you were able to imprint these devices using the intention, the will, the consciousness of a total of four people in deep concentration, yes? | ||
| Right. | ||
| We've done it with two, we've done it with four, and we've done it with six. | ||
| By the way, with any change in terms of the number of minds concentrating on the percentages, anything there? | ||
| Difficult to distinguish that kind of thing. | ||
| The intention is to... | ||
| If you talk to a healer with really good track record and you ask them what they do, they tell you that they just try to be as perfect a channel as they can to let the universal energy flow through. | ||
| We try to do the same thing in this regard, and so it's almost as if the unseen universe does the heavy lifting. | ||
| apparently uh... | ||
| so it I did this quite some time ago. | ||
| And it did seem to have a tremendous effect on weather systems. | ||
| I'm just not going to go into the whole story right now, but we did these experiments, and I realized the power of consciousness. | ||
| It hit me like a brick, not quick enough, because I did about 10 or 11 experiments before it hit me, but it did hit me. | ||
| And then I started looking at what Princeton is doing. | ||
| And now comes you, Professor, with more really serious hard evidence. | ||
| Right. | ||
| And I should add one thing to the tail end of the statistical experiments with the biological systems. | ||
| We found that the statistical probability, the p-value, was better than 0.001, which means that there was less than one part in a thousand chance that it occurred as a random phenomenon. | ||
| So these are very robust experimental results. | ||
| And if you ask yourself, well, what does this tell us? | ||
| Of course, the first thing it tells us is that the unstated assumption of conventional establishment science is incredibly wrong. | ||
| Yeah, way wrong. | ||
| Way wrong indeed. | ||
| And the second is that the intention applied this way, that there's a kind of intelligence in the imprinted device, because the one that's for the water pH to go up, the experiments, it only goes up, it never goes down. | ||
| The one for down never goes up, it always goes down. | ||
| This is to us as magic. | ||
| Well, exactly. | ||
| And, you know, Arthur C. Clarke said a long time ago that any sufficiently advanced technology beyond your own must appear as magic. | ||
| And it does appear as magic. | ||
| And I paraphrase that to say that any experimental observation or personal observation that can't be explained by the conventional paradigm has to be considered as magic, as real magic, until the paradigm is expanded to see the lawfulness of the data. | ||
| I have a feeling this will be regarded as magic for some time to come. | ||
| Despite the great advances that we're making in our beginnings of understanding of this phenomena, this force, whatever it is, it's going to be a while, I think, before we fully understand it. | ||
| Oh, I think so. | ||
| Now, I need to add one other thing, because at least in this primary part, it is that we came to the conclusion that the action of this device, this intention imprinted electrical device, just by being turned on in the room and over a three-month period, it looked as if we were conditioning the space itself. | ||
| That is, we were changing it in some way that we were beginning to access another level of physical reality. | ||
| And that actually was the precursor that for any psychoenergetic experiment to be successful, you have to first get to that stage where you access... | ||
| Okay, now the way we determined it is the second group of experiments. | ||
| We noticed that there were three characteristics of what we call a condition space. | ||
| That is, we saw the experimental data. | ||
| It didn't really change much for about the first two months. | ||
| And then it started to rise and rise and rise and then taper off and plateau at the level of change intended by the particular experiment. | ||
| And then once it was at that plateau level, that upper plateau level, you could take the device away, put it in a Faraday cage, and things would stay at that level. | ||
| So we decided that the space had been conditioned somehow by this little device, and there were remarkable things happening. | ||
| So let me talk about the remarkable things that happened then. | ||
| Please. | ||
| The characteristics, there were three of them. | ||
| There was first, we observed, and I'll explain it in what this means in a minute, a DC magnetic field polarity effect. | ||
| The second one was we observed oscillations of material properties. | ||
| That's oscillations of pH, oscillations of electrical conductivity, oscillations of water temperature, oscillations of air temperature. | ||
| When I say oscillations, I mean for air temperature, something like three degrees, and the thermistor we were using, we have two kinds. | ||
| One measures A hundredth of a degree sensitivity or a thousandth of a degree sensitivity. | ||
| So again, we're saying that the signature of the oscillation amplitude was 100 to 1,000 times the noise. | ||
| And the third characteristic was what we'll label an information entanglement between remote spaces, which is very much like that initial experiment of setting these things 100 meters apart that I talked about. | ||
| The quantum effect, yes. | ||
| Well, we'll talk about that. | ||
| That is where it's going, though, right? | ||
| It may get, well, yes, it's quantum, but it's not conventional quantum. | ||
| Because we're talking about macroscopic spaces like 1,000 cubic feet at room temperature being information entangled with another laboratory of a similar size, 6,000 miles away. | ||
| And so we'll come to that. | ||
| That came out of the replication experiment. | ||
| That's quantum, though. | ||
| It sounds quantum to me. | ||
| Well, that's because people talk about information entanglement, and the only one they know is the quantum one. | ||
| But the quantum one is dealing with nucleons, very small particles near absolute zero, okay, of temperature. | ||
| Do you claim, Professor, to have some understanding of how the information gets from you do? | ||
| Yes, I do. | ||
| We may get into that, but that may be a little more complex than your audience would like. | ||
| But we can, let's just move the next step. | ||
| The next step is, let me go back to this business of DC magnetic field polarity effect. | ||
| Right. | ||
| When you're measuring pH, you have a jar containing water, and you have a pH electrode and a temperature probe. | ||
| Right, you're measuring. | ||
| Right. | ||
| And what we did was we put a disc magnet underneath the jar and centered along the axis of the jar, so it's all very symmetrical. | ||
| First, let's say with the north pole up. | ||
| And we continuously monitor the pH for four or five days. | ||
| And then we just turn the disk magnet over, and the south pole is up. | ||
| And we monitor for four or five days. | ||
| Now, that's a heretical experiment because most scientists know, well, probably every scientist knows, that at our normal atom-molecule level of reality, we only have magnetic dipoles. | ||
| And if you invert the order, the orientation of a magnetic dipole, you don't change the energy at all. | ||
| So the magnetic force should not change at all. | ||
| And in fact, if you do that in an unconditioned space, you get no effect. | ||
| However, we see differences of a half a pH unit in a conditioned space or one and a half pH units in a conditioned space. | ||
| Huge effects. | ||
| And so if you say, well, how is that possible? | ||
| In pH, huh? | ||
| The reason I'm saying this is because they make magnetic water conditioners. | ||
| Are you aware of those? | ||
| I'm aware of those. | ||
| That's a different... | ||
| To remove particulate matter, right? | ||
| Yes, exactly. | ||
| Yeah, that's a standard kind of procedure. | ||
| But it shouldn't have any effect on pH. | ||
| No, it shouldn't have any effect on pH if the space and if the equipment is in our normal, it's called the electromagnetic gauge symmetry state of our normal world. | ||
| But when you condition a space with one of these little devices, we access another level of reality. | ||
| So doing that DC magnetic field polarity effect and seeing a big pH difference, if you ask yourself, how is that possible to get another field of reality you refer to the effect of consciousness? | ||
| Well, that's the starting point, okay? | ||
| And then it's in the device. | ||
| And then the device does something to the room. | ||
| And the room then in the room and the equipment that's in the room now is able to access something in nature that couldn't access before. | ||
| And if you ask yourself how you can get that effect, you can only come to the conclusion you have to access magnetic monopoles. | ||
| Now that's a heretical statement because the U.S. government and other governments of the world have spent billions of dollars searching for magnetic monopoles, and they haven't found them. | ||
| But all that really says is that you can't access them from the normal electromagnetic gauge symmetry state of our world. | ||
| It's called the U1 state. | ||
| And in essence, when you lift that state to some other level, and our experimental data shows that you do, then you are able to access this other level of reality. | ||
| Now, where is it? | ||
| That's the next experiment, these oscillations. | ||
| We decided to probe these temperature oscillations in the room. | ||
| They're global in the room. | ||
| And we set up a Faraday cage with a jar of water and pH measurement system in it. | ||
| And we had a line of thermistors about 11 feet long going from where the cage was out into the hall. | ||
| And the temperature oscillations were the order of, as I say, 3 degrees centigrade. | ||
| Now, for normal reality, away from what you would call a source, it should just fall off asymptotically to zero as you go away from the cage. | ||
| Well, this doesn't. | ||
| Turns out it goes asymptotically. | ||
| It falls off, and then it builds up again to a big peak, and then it slowly falls off as you go 11 feet out into the hall. | ||
| Wow. | ||
| Now, we said, okay, well, you can get temperature oscillations just by density inversions in the air, so let's check that. | ||
| So what we did is we blew fan, a strong fan, on these line of thermistors. | ||
| And the oscillations, they jiggle a bit, but then they stabilize themselves, and they stayed. | ||
| So it says that the oscillations are not coming from the atom-molecule level of physical reality. | ||
| They're coming from another level. | ||
| From another reality. | ||
| Well, the other level, from my modeling, is that it comes from the coarse physical vacuum level of reality. | ||
| And what that is, is if you look at any atom or molecule, the nucleons that make up that atom and molecule are incredibly small. | ||
| So most of it is empty space. | ||
| And I call that empty space the vacuum level of reality. | ||
| That is, there is stuff going on in that level of reality that we are affecting by consciousness. | ||
| Dark matter? | ||
| Well, we can come to that too, because there is a relationship. | ||
| Well, could that be what you're talking about when you talk about that relationship? | ||
| Well, let me say there is a distinct connection, but it's more complicated than that. | ||
| So I don't want to jump to that conclusion. | ||
| But I can indicate how that can come about. | ||
| Well, still, what you've discovered is, I mean, so far it's gigantic. | ||
| It is gigantic. | ||
| And I think the thing, you know, most people think of the physical vacuum as being nothing, just because it's the absence of atoms or molecules or other nucleons. | ||
| But if you look energetically, you find, and Wheeler did this calculation a long time ago, and he's a very famous astronomer and physicist. | ||
| And for quantum mechanics and relativity theory to be internally self-consistent, and that is all that science can ever do for you. | ||
| It can't give you truth. | ||
| It can only give internal self-consistency. | ||
| It turns out that Wheeler calculated that each cubic centimeter of vacuum had to contain a potential energy of 10 to the power 94 grams per cc. | ||
| That's huge. | ||
| But what does it mean in a practical terms? | ||
| So let's just look at two sums, and we'll compare them. | ||
| The first one is we know, we think, let's say, take a volume of our universe, 15 billion light years in radius, and we multiply it by the average matter density. | ||
| And astronomers give us that number. | ||
| So we have a number. | ||
| We'll just place that on the right side. | ||
| And now let's take a single hydrogen atom. | ||
| Its volume is about 1 over 1 followed by 22 zeros. | ||
| So it's very small. | ||
| All right, you're going to have to try and remember not to go over our heads. | ||
| And I include myself in that. | ||
| Yeah, all right. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| I understand. | ||
| It's difficult, but let me continue for a minute and we'll just look at what this says. | ||
| We take this single hydrogen atom, it's almost all empty space. | ||
| We multiply it by this 10 to the power 94, and we place that on the left side. | ||
| And now we compare the one with the other. | ||
| And it turns out the one on the left side is a trillion times the one on the right side. | ||
| So it says that even that small, it says the amount of energy stored in the vacuum compared to all the mass in all the planets and all the stars and all the cosmic dust as far as we can see, the vacuum stuff outweighs it by huge amounts. | ||
| What is in mass, in physical matter, is hardly the fragrance of a whisper. | ||
| I can't get my head around that. | ||
| I understand what you've just told me, but I can't imagine that. | ||
| Well, it's huge. | ||
| And the issue is the vacuum is where our future lies. | ||
| I mean, that's where our science needs to go. | ||
| That's where consciousness has its play. | ||
| zero-point place? | ||
| Well, zero-point is a little different, but it's... | ||
| Right. | ||
| Well, there are two issues on zero-point energy. | ||
| The zero-point energy issue is the energy. | ||
| It's due to the vibrational states of atoms at absolute zero. | ||
| And that energy is huge, okay, from matter, but it is trivial compared to what is stored in the latent vacuum itself. | ||
| Now, many people use zero-point energy loosely, meaning that they include the vacuum energies. | ||
| And I'm just trying to be more clear and more careful so that we can distinguish them. | ||
| They're both useful, but ultimately useful. | ||
| But the one where our entire evolutionary future is, is in probing the vacuum. | ||
| Well, with regard to what you've already proven. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| You're going to do something fantastic with it, I'm sure. | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| You're going to publish, right? | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Well, it should be in science at the very least. | ||
| And I was sitting here prior to the program tonight thinking about why in the world I am so fascinated by holes in the ground. | ||
| Deep holes in the ground, an effort by the Japanese to drill into the mantle of the Earth. | ||
| And all of this absolutely captivates me. | ||
| I mean, fascinates me. | ||
| There's something about... | ||
| It's as good or better than space, in my opinion. | ||
| A journey to the center of the earth. | ||
| That's the name of the article. | ||
| It's actually not down to the core. | ||
| But you just know if they're going into the mantle now, they're going to be going into the core eventually. | ||
| And what happens when you drill that deeply into the earth? | ||
| What do you find? | ||
| All of a sudden we'll have an understanding of what's beneath our feet. | ||
| Something we really don't have now. | ||
| You know, scientists speculate that it's an iron core or that it's a gazillion degrees or various things, but we really don't know. | ||
| Do we? | ||
| Nor do we know if there's life beneath our feet. | ||
| When you think about it in a logical way, life beneath our feet perhaps is more likely than life out there. | ||
| Or at least as likely. | ||
| I mean, the planet has already shown its propensity for life. | ||
| We're here, right? | ||
| So why not beneath the Earth? | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| I've just been really stuck on a fascination, Mel's hole, all of that, of course. | ||
| And by the way, there's a new one in Canada that I'm following. | ||
| It's just some something about going under the earth. | ||
| I don't know. | ||
| It's got a lot of attraction for me. | ||
| World news, very briefly, let's see. | ||
| Aruba, two men charged Sunday in connection with the disappearance last week of Alabama, an Alabama teenager who was visiting the island with classmates to celebrate high school graduation. | ||
| Aruba's attorney general said authorities on the Dutch Caribbean island also requested a special diving team from the FBI because of rough currents in some areas. | ||
| Saddam Hussein is going to go on trial within two months on charges of crimes against humanity. | ||
| That's a tough one. | ||
| Prosecutors focusing on 12 thoroughly documented counts, including, of course, the gassing of thousands of Kurds in northern Iraq. | ||
| And I guess they're screaming for Saddam's head. | ||
| Michael Jackson was taken to an emergency room Sunday for treatment of back problems. | ||
| Well, I know about that. | ||
| They've been plaguing him throughout his molestation trial. | ||
| He later left to the thunder of flash bulbs. | ||
| Jackson, accompanied by a bodyguard, arrived around rather at Santa Yenz Valley Cottage Hospital about five miles from his Neverland ranch around 2.30 in the afternoon. | ||
| Hezbollah and its Shiite allies claimed victory in southern Lebanon Sunday, second stage of national elections there, and so they're really whooping it up. | ||
| A stormy decade-long relationship between Apple computers and IBM is over. | ||
| According to published reports, Apple CEO Steve Jobs is expected to announce Monday morning at the company's software developers conference in San Francisco that Apple will discontinue using microprocessor chips made by IBM in favor of Intel. | ||
| Trouble at the top. | ||
| About 400 people turned out for a Confederate memorial service held Sunday under the rebel battle flag singing Dixie laying roses at the Confederate monument. | ||
| Miles to the east, meanwhile, protesters demonstrated their disapproval by marching outside the Missouri Governor's Mansion. | ||
| In a few moments, coming up, if you've got something really cool that you want to get on the air, we're going to do open lines for the balance of this hour. | ||
| And one can never tell when one opens the lines what might happen. | ||
| Just about anything, actually. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| Yet another comet has been added to the list of potentially threatening near-Earth objects maintained by NASA's Jet Propulsion Lab, Comet Catalina. | ||
| 2005 JQ5 is the largest and therefore most potentially devastating of 70 objects that are being tracked right now that might hit the Earth or have the potential to hit the Earth. | ||
| The listing of Catalina underscores the uncertainty and the knowledge of whether comets or asteroids pose a greater threat to Earth. | ||
| I would think asteroids. | ||
| I would vote for asteroids. | ||
| I mean, a lot of traditional thinking about comets is they're ice and snow, right? | ||
| That can't be as bad as a nickel-iron comet, in my way of thinking. | ||
| Anyway, so there's another one on the list of possible ones that could hit us, and I always wonder, and I bet you do too, whether they would tell us, number one, and if they did, what that... | ||
| I guess, wipe out human life. | ||
|
unidentified
|
What a thought. | |
| Americans guzzle 65 billion gallons of fuel a year. | ||
| And lately, we've been paying a pretty penny, I'd say, at the pump. | ||
| News Channel 4 is a local story, I guess, has done reports in the past on how to get the most out of your gas. | ||
| Now, here's a new way. | ||
| Here's a man who fills up his tank just but once every two months. | ||
| One tank of gas, literally, will last him two months. | ||
| What he's doing is freezing the price of gas by freezing something else. | ||
| This is really interesting. | ||
| People complain about the price of gas, and we're all spending dearly to stay on the road these days. | ||
| The money we spend on gas seems to burn up faster than fuel. | ||
| David Hutchison is a cryogenics expert. | ||
| So what he did is build this cryo process himself. | ||
| He runs a business out of his garage where he cryogenically tempers all kinds of metal. | ||
| What he does is submerge car parts in a frozen tank of nitrogen vapor that's 300 degrees below zero. | ||
| You imagine that? | ||
| And the result is he is getting about 120 miles per gallon. | ||
| NASCAR is beginning to do this. | ||
| And I can't imagine, well, maybe I can. | ||
| When you cryogenically freeze wire, a wire, for example, or other metal, it becomes a much better conductor, right, electrically. | ||
| But I'm trying to, in my mind, understand what cryogenically freezing actual car parts, you know, carburetors freezing the engine components. | ||
| They're talking about dunking everything in. | ||
| And whatever he's done, he gets about 120 miles to the gallon. | ||
| 120 miles to the gallon. | ||
| So what is it that this man has done? | ||
| So if this is a legit story, we need to find out more. | ||
| That's all I can say. | ||
| Some of you may find it on the web. | ||
| It was KFOR television. | ||
| And I would imagine there should be other reporting on it. | ||
| It's very important. | ||
| I mean, if you could actually freeze parts, surely he can't use them in that frozen state. | ||
| So he's referring to mileage he gets after he's done the process, I would suppose. | ||
| Anyway, to the lines. | ||
| First time caller line, you are on the air. | ||
| Good morning. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Is this me? | |
| Yes. | ||
| Hey, Art, this is Adam. | ||
| How's it going, friendly Illinois? | ||
| That was fine, Adam. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I actually had a question about the Japanese scientist drawing to the center of the Earth, but first I actually wanted to They're drilling to the mantle. | |
| There is a soft nugget core, right? | ||
| They're not going to the core. | ||
| They're going to the mantle between us and the core. | ||
| But it's still very, very deep. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay, and that's supposed to be the deepest hole ever, though, correct? | |
| Well, sure. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| I'm guessing that you have the sounds of hell, correct? | ||
| With over in Brazil, I guess it was? | ||
| You know, I do know it was Siberia, sir. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Er, Siberia. | |
| Okay, I was wondering if you think they'd be able to be getting the same sounds as that there. | ||
| My guess would be that if, in fact, the following sounds, of course, are from Siberia or alleged to be from Siberia, the sound of hell. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The End Sounds like quite a party, huh? | |
| Anyway, that's what the caller is referring to, right? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Correct. | |
| Well, I would think if the Japanese go down... | ||
| The Siberian hole, deep as it was, is not going to be anywhere near as deep as this one. | ||
| So they're going to drill right through hell. | ||
|
unidentified
|
That'd be a scary thought. | |
| That'd be a scary thought. | ||
| Well, you know what's even scarier, sir? | ||
|
unidentified
|
What's that? | |
| What if it's like, you know, letting them out, letting out hell? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Heck, if they would have done that the last time, if it would have escaped, correct? | |
| Well, you would think so, yes. | ||
| Although, I think they plugged up the hole, took the microphones, the sound recording equipment, and ran like hell. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And then I actually had another question for you, a suggestion for your show. | |
| I was wondering if maybe like on a Saturday or Sunday, you might be able to do Dreamland like you did back in the 90s. | ||
| All right. | ||
| Thank you very much. | ||
| Dreamland, of course, has been turned over a long time ago to Whitley Strieber, my very good friend Whitley. | ||
| And he continues the tradition of streaming on the net. | ||
| So that's his entire baby right now. | ||
| Wildcard line, you're on the air. | ||
| Hello. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Oh, hi, this is Jim from Cupertino, California. | |
| Hey, Jim. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I just wanted to talk a little more about the medical marijuana community. | |
| We're waiting for a Supreme Court decision to be handed down either tomorrow or possibly next Monday. | ||
| And I thought maybe you'd let me do another bong hit on the air before they make it illegal. | ||
| Are you anticipating defeat? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I'm personally not. | |
| A lot of people in the community tend to take a very dim view of anything the federal government does. | ||
| But if you look at the previous case, the Oakland case that was up before the court in the year 2001, they made a point that nobody ever raised the constitutional question. | ||
| And what's been done in the current case is to actually, the Supreme Court, in theory, can't rewrite law once the Congress has written it. | ||
| But if somebody can properly raise the constitutional reach of the federal government, that's what we're hoping. | ||
| We're hoping they're going to say, you know, as long as I get my pot in state and it's not involved with the black market and interstate commerce, that the feds have no right to regulate it. | ||
| What do you think your chances are? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Personally, very good. | |
| Everybody else I know is a real liberal in this cause, and they all complain about the Bush court, and I don't believe that. | ||
| I think the Supreme Court is pretty balanced. | ||
| I think you're right. | ||
| I don't think it's the Bush Court at all. | ||
| And a funny thing happens to people when they get to the Supreme Court. | ||
| They forget all those who got them there, and properly so, in my dad. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And they tend to get more liberal as they get older or as they get more further away from political concerns, like you're saying. | |
| Yes. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, you know, the only last thing I'd just like to say, you know, a lot of people, even supporters, characterize this as the will of the people because of Proposition 215. | |
| But I'd like to remind people it's also the will of the legislature in California and the will of the California Supreme Court. | ||
| So given that all three branches, effectively, of government in the state are supporting it, we hope the Supreme Court just allows the state laws a chance to work. | ||
| And I do a lot of work to try to weed out some of the shadier people in the business anyways. | ||
| There's some doctors out there that you just give them $100 and they're going to write you a note, and that's not right. | ||
| You should follow the law ultimately. | ||
| I certainly agree with that. | ||
| All right. | ||
| Thank you very much. | ||
| Well, perhaps it should be that marijuana just should be legal. | ||
| Not just for people with a doctor's note, but just plain legal. | ||
| Thought about that? | ||
| I certainly have. | ||
| I lived in the state of Alaska when the Alaskan Supreme Court absolutely said, look, two ounces of marijuana, perfectly okay for anybody to have at home. | ||
| And the roof did not cave in. | ||
| Women were not suddenly being raped in droves. | ||
| Accident rates didn't go up. | ||
| It just plain wasn't a problem. | ||
| And then the Washington boys came along and sponsored an effort to get it made illegal once again in Alaska because, of course, they're trying to fight the war on drugs. | ||
| And they won. | ||
| But for a long period of time, it was quite legal in Alaska, and the walls of Jericho did not come tumbling down. | ||
| East of the Rockies, you're on the air. | ||
| Hi. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, hi. | |
| How are you doing, Art? | ||
| Quite well. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| Well, the thing I wanted to talk to you about was what would you say if I told you that I know what the UFOs are and how they work? | ||
| I would say I would say let's hear it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| Well, basically, it comes down to electromagnetic principles. | ||
| The first time I ever got the idea was actually when I read the book by Philip Corsell. | ||
| I don't know if you have you read that book? | ||
| Oh, of course. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And in there, he describes the ship, and then several times he talks about it being as if it was a giant capacitor. | |
| Well, it wasn't a giant capacitor. | ||
| It couldn't possibly be. | ||
| It wouldn't be able to do what it would need to do to get here. | ||
| But it started giving me the idea of, you know, if we trust that what he's saying is the truth and that it was an electrical machine and it looked like a giant capacitor, what was it really? | ||
| I think there's a reasonable chance, sir, that what he refers to as a giant capacitor will turn out to have a function pulsing some immense voltage. | ||
| I mean, the experiments that are being done now on anti-gravity are circling around these areas. | ||
| So it wouldn't be a surprise that it would turn out that way. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, but it's even simpler than that, though. | |
| It's actually just plain old physics. | ||
| It's just electromagnetics. | ||
| Well, if it's so simple, then build me a saucer and I'll make you rich. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| Well, how about could you find me somebody that could verify, somebody who's a physicist who specializes in electromagnetics, and I'll be more than happy to sit down and talk with them and explain my idea? | ||
| Well, okay. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I know you have a lot of contacts. | |
| That's why I'm asking. | ||
| Well, I have some contacts, yes. | ||
| All right. | ||
| Well, well said. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Sorry, but talk is cheap. | ||
| And whether it comes to a free energy device. | ||
| And by the way, my offer is a standing offer. | ||
| Free energy device? | ||
| Even something like a little toy that scuttles across the room and is able to demonstrate more output than input. | ||
| Or the ability to continue perpetually, even a little toy. | ||
| Or a saucer which can maintain itself above ground, defying or repulsing gravity, however it might be done. | ||
| Any of those things would be absolutely welcome. | ||
| Bring them on, baby, and I'll make you rich. | ||
| West of the Rockies, you're on the air. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hi, Art. | |
| This is Andrea, and I'm in Tahunga, California. | ||
| Hey. | ||
| KFI, 6.40 a.m. | ||
| I was researching alternative energy in vehicles, and I came across a website, and a man was supposed to have put together a microwave car. | ||
| Have you heard anything about it? | ||
| Oh, that strikes some kind of a bell. | ||
| A microwave car. | ||
| All right. | ||
| Can you describe how it works? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, basically, the micro, well, he was using the magnetron from the microwave to boil water to make steam, and it was a steam car, and he put it on a, you know, one of those lawnmowers that you ride on? | |
| Yes. | ||
| And he has a little whistle on it, too. | ||
| I understand he has a, he can cook a hot dog as well. | ||
| Really? | ||
| Well, see, these things are all interesting, but that's the road I was just down. | ||
| Nobody ever brings anything. | ||
| Over Unity, flying saucers. | ||
| Boy, I'm open for it all. | ||
| I'm just a center. | ||
| I mean, you could get to me, and if it's real, well, hell, you don't need me. | ||
| But, you know, I sort of tend to doubt some of these things until I get to see them. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And by the way, do any of your listeners here in the U.S. have a Sinclair C5 electric vehicle, if you know what that is? | |
| Not specifically. | ||
| What does it run on batteries? | ||
|
unidentified
|
It runs on batteries, and you can pedal it, too. | |
| And it's been around 20 years, and it's sort of like a classic. | ||
| I have one. | ||
| Oh, wait a minute. | ||
| You have one, really? | ||
| Oh, yeah. | ||
| So what is it? | ||
| If the batteries run down, then you pedal, or do you pedal to charge the batteries? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, you charge it up as you pedal, but you can pedal it if the batteries run down. | |
| So it was designed by a man named Sir Clive Sinclair in the UK. | ||
| How fast can you go? | ||
|
unidentified
|
It's not the speediest vehicle in the world, but maybe 25, something like that. | |
| 25? | ||
| That's not bad. | ||
| That's not bad. | ||
| Sounds like fun. | ||
|
unidentified
|
It's fun and it stops traffic. | |
| So every time I take it out, I get some visitations. | ||
| Music. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| This is a pretty unusual email, folks. | ||
| I'm going to withhold the name, but I do have a name and phone number to go with this. | ||
| It says, Hey Art, my eight-year-old son has died. | ||
| Don't they? | ||
| My eight-year-old son has been telling us he's not a boy and believes he is part alien. | ||
| He's not sure what race, funny enough. | ||
| Since he was young, he'd draw pictures of what he believes he saw on an alien craft. | ||
| Once he drew with chalk on the sidewalk, a picture of our solar system in its infancy stage, as he put it. | ||
| The sun he drew was gigantic, and when I asked him about that, he said he was told that's how it looked when it was created before we knew it as it is the sun today, much smaller in size. | ||
| Last week, my wife caught him looking to the heavens, doing sign language, and speaking gibberish. | ||
| When she asked him what he was doing, he told her he was downloading. | ||
| What does all this mean? | ||
| He mentioned when he was younger, he had three alien friends that took him on a ship and never hurt him. | ||
| Just played with him. | ||
| He does, however, remember seeing people laying on gurneys and what look like operations being done. | ||
| I'm telling you, Art, this kid's TV, his whole life has been monitored. | ||
| He's never taken a sign language, and these stories started when he was three. | ||
| Who can we talk to? | ||
| My son has seen a psychologist who's determined him to be near genius status and probably ADHD. | ||
| He has outgrown her assistance. | ||
| Emotionally, he's always had a hard time because of his intellect. | ||
| Getting along with other kids has been tough for him. | ||
| We need to talk to somebody. | ||
| Recommend somebody if you can. | ||
| Well, I'm not good in the field of recommending somebody who would talk to him, but he's a very, very interesting case. | ||
| As they say, out of the mouths of babes, huh? | ||
| What do you all make out of that? | ||
| First time caller line, you're on the air. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hello. | |
| Hi, Art. | ||
| This is JD at WTAQ 1360 Green Bay, Wisconsin. | ||
| Yes, sir. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I just wanted to represent the issue you have about marijuana. | |
| Oh, marijuana, yes. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And the calming effect that it does for the patients and the cancers that they have to calm their system down so they can eat. | |
| Well, there is that, and it's anti-nausea factor, allegedly. | ||
| There are those who argue with that, say there are better drugs for anti-nausea, but yes, it works. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, it's God's gift to the earth. | |
| And I'm also bringing up these issues besides that, about ethanol that can produce 8 to 10 times more ethanol than corn can produce. | ||
| And they say that the pulp factor, if you do one acre of trees per acre, that one acre of hemp could do four times the amount of pulp. | ||
| Oh, sir. | ||
| The Wall Street Journal did a very comprehensive article on hemp. | ||
| And if we would be allowed to grow hemp for all its uses in the U.S., it would bring $500 billion in revenue to the U.S. government. | ||
| That's half a trillion dollars, my friend. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Into the economics of the United States. | |
| Yeah, absolutely. | ||
| Which would create a lot of jobs and it's really time we stopped being stupid about marijuana. | ||
| Diane, I'm serious. | ||
| It's time to speak. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Absolutely. | |
| You know, if you could take a handful of seeds and go in your backyard and throw them in your backyard and have a cash crop. | ||
| You can't take old Jim Beam bottles and grow new Jim Beam. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, back in the 1700s, they used to pay their taxes with hemp because it was made out of rope and canvases back in those days. | |
| Our constitutional rights was wrote up on hemp paper back as far as 1700s go. | ||
| Where is this big hemp victory in WW2 that we had at one time? | ||
| Hemp victory. | ||
| Hemp 4 victory is what it was, actually. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Look, it's time we took off the idiot blinders. | ||
| Marijuana is not nearly so harmful as is alcohol. | ||
| That's a fact. | ||
| The cost of alcohol to our national economy is about $100 billion or better per year. | ||
| Very damaging. | ||
| The cost of marijuana in that regard would probably be just a tiny fraction of 1% of alcohol. | ||
| So there you are. | ||
| Longcardline, you're on the air. | ||
| Hello. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Good evening, Art. | |
| Good evening. | ||
|
unidentified
|
This is Mark calling from Iowa City, Iowa. | |
| Yes, sir. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I'm calling about the cryogenic treatment of the engines. | |
| Oh, yes. | ||
| Can you tell me something about that? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, I've been a member of a pit crew now for about nine years. | |
| Yeah, I heard that the race car drivers are using it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes. | |
| Once you've maxed out the engine displacement and the engine power through the intake and all that, you can get a lot more power by reducing the friction inside the engine and better fuel economy. | ||
| So that's what it does. | ||
| It reduces the friction. | ||
| All right. | ||
| May I ask a couple of questions? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes. | |
| Is the effect long-lasting? | ||
| In other words, if you freeze these components, do you have to use them in that frozen state to attain that or does it linger? | ||
| Does the effect linger? | ||
|
unidentified
|
The effect realigns the molecular structure on the surface of the parts. | |
| I got that. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Specifically, the bearing surfaces. | |
| No, what I'm asking is, in terms of usefulness in increasing power or increasing mileage or efficiency, however you want to think about it, does the effect linger after the part unfreezes? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes. | |
| It's useful during the machining process. | ||
| It produces a much smoother surface. | ||
| Most modern lubricants are molecular-based, kind of like tiny ball bearings, but they don't do any good on most surfaces because at that level of magnification, most surfaces look like the Grand Canyon. | ||
| So, in other words, smoother, less friction. | ||
| So there's a realignment of the molecular structure of the material, making it smoother with less friction and increased efficiency. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes, much less drag. | |
| The difference is that a full-grown man, If he walks up to an engine, grabs the big pulley on the front, he has to use both hands to turn that engine over. | ||
| What if a seven-year-old girl could turn that same engine over with one hand? | ||
| Right. | ||
| Obvious. | ||
|
unidentified
|
That's the difference. | |
| Well, and how long will that effect last after the cryogenic treatment? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, the cryogenic treatment comes into play during the machining. | |
| As you get wear into those parts, you will lose that effect slowly. | ||
| Slowly? | ||
| Over a period of years, for example? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, race engines don't last years. | |
| Well, apply it. | ||
| Now, in other words, just take the process and apply it to the average consumer car. | ||
| Let's say they came out of Ford and Chevy all cryogenically fit and ready to go. | ||
| How many years would you notice this increased efficiency or months or whatever? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Four or five years. | |
| Oh, well, see, that's serious stuff, sir. | ||
|
unidentified
|
That's not bad. | |
| That's not bad at all. | ||
| So we're going to have to look into this. | ||
| You know, the story immediately piqued my interest, and now you've explained it. | ||
| I really appreciate it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
All right. | |
| All right. | ||
| Thank you very much. | ||
| Well, that was the big question for me, how long the effect would last, and apparently years. | ||
| I wonder how expensive the effect is to do. | ||
| Now, of course, the race cars, you know, those guys can afford it. | ||
| But if they were to do it in mass, wouldn't that make a gigantic difference, even if it was only for four or five years, in the national gas mileage figures? | ||
| East of the Rockies, you're on the air. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hi. | |
| Hi, I'm actually west of the Rockies. | ||
| I'm sorry, east. | ||
| Here I am in Detroit. | ||
| So you don't even know where you are. | ||
| Detroit's absolutely east of the Rockies. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I'm getting away with the thing about the engines in Detroit here, so that's how I got confused. | |
| I see. | ||
| Okay, well, welcome to the program. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Anyway. | |
| I'm calling because back in about 1960-61, I can remember where I was standing when I read a small article that came in on the wire, obviously not locally, to Dayton where I was temporarily living down in Ohio about the drilling of the Mohole, which was going to be the deepest hole ever drilled. | ||
| In Siberia? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, it was Russian. | |
| Right. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And that the drilling stopped because when they got to a certain point, they heard the sounds that apparently you have a recording of your show. | |
| That is correct. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And that when they heard these horrible sounds, they just stopped the drilling. | |
| What would you have done? | ||
|
unidentified
|
I would have done the same. | |
| They plugged the hole? | ||
| They grabbed their. | ||
|
unidentified
|
No, no, no. | |
| No, it's not. | ||
| Oh, no, no, no, no. | ||
| Three paragraphs. | ||
| The Reuters story, my dear, went on to say went on to say they plugged the hole. | ||
| Well, they grabbed their microphones up, plugged the hole, and ran like hell. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I'll be darned. | |
| Good, good. | ||
| Because I've heard you say you wonder if it's true, and I couldn't, you know, I thought, why doesn't he mention it if he has seen the article, the news report all those years ago? | ||
| Yes, Reuters. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Great, great. | |
| But how come you never told us that? | ||
| Well, my dear, I have. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, have you? | |
| You might have missed it. | ||
| I've been on the air for years and years and years. | ||
| You're very welcome. | ||
| You're very welcome. | ||
| Sure, it was a Reuters story. | ||
| Every now and then, I used to dig that story out and have the website post it. | ||
| Quite a remarkable story. | ||
| And I wonder what the Japanese, well, when they get to the mantle, or even previous to getting to the mantle, between where we now stand and the mantle, is where the Siberians would have been. | ||
| So the Japanese are going to drill right through hell. | ||
| West of the Rockies, you're on the air. | ||
| Hi. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Good evening, Art. | |
| The Brian on Kansy R from Bakersfield. | ||
| Hello, Brian. | ||
|
unidentified
|
How are you this evening? | |
| Very well. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Good to hear. | |
| Not too long ago, you had Major Ed Dames on for the umpteenth time, and I always enjoy hearing what he has to say. | ||
| And it seems to me several times he made a prediction as to a catastrophe that would occur with the next sending up of the shuttle. | ||
| Oh, no, no, no, no, that's not quite right. | ||
| What he said was, when you hear about a shuttle in an emergency mode returning to Earth because of a meteor storm, that's when to duck your head. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I see. | |
| So he didn't say the next shuttle. | ||
| He said, when you see a shuttle in that kind of emergency and for that reason, then it's time to duck. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| It seemed to me, and maybe I'm remembering it incorrectly, very possible, but he seemed to tie this in with at least approximately around January or February. | ||
| And of course, that has since passed. | ||
| So I'm wondering if you've modified that or not. | ||
| Okay, well, obviously I cannot answer for Ed. | ||
| I thought it was December of this year that he had talked of. | ||
| I think it would have had to have been because we weren't flying the shuttle as we are not yet doing now. | ||
| So I think that it would have been perhaps this coming December. | ||
| I'd have to check the tape myself. | ||
| First time caller line, you're on the air. | ||
| Hi. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Good morning, Art. | |
| Good morning, sir. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hi, my name's Pete. | |
| I'm calling from Omaha, Nebraska, 1110 KFAB. | ||
| Yes, sir. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The blowtorch. | |
| Yeah, we got a weird incident here a couple of, well, last month in the month of May. | ||
| I was working outside in the back, happened to look up, just we're close to the flight path of the U.S. Air Force Base down at Stratcom. | ||
| Yes. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And happened to look up, just hear the roar of the jet roaring over, and happened to look up. | |
| It was a cloudy day. | ||
| Mount in the high cloud base comes out a craft. | ||
| Now, I've seen fighter jets and everything before, but this wasn't anything like that. | ||
| It was more of a disc shape. | ||
| Don't want to sound cliche, but it was more of a disshed. | ||
| And as it was almost moving away from the Air Force craft, but happened to start hovering and actually moving back towards this original, where it originally started from. | ||
| And it was shaped like a disc. | ||
| Like a disc. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Almost a gunmetal chrome color. | |
| Got it. | ||
| I had a sighting exactly like that. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The thing that, you know, I was taking it all in, but the thing that actually I was amazed by was right when I was screaming, I was doing some work for my mom at her garden. | |
| I said, Mom, you've got to get out of here. | ||
| And look, well, the thing just went off quicker than anything I ever possibly think of, any technology. | ||
| And if we have it, well, I ended up calling up Peter Davenport, talking to him and the U.S. Air Force Base at Stratcom, and the colonel there, or the administrator there, or whoever I talked to, was very, very interested about five-minute conversation with him, very candid, and it was just amazing. | ||
| Well, you know, you people in Nebraska, I'll tell you, I wonder if you have ever had nightmares of like waking up one sunny morning, going outside, and seeing nothing but about a million ICBMs streaking toward space. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I tell you what, it's been interesting living here as long as I have 35 years. | |
| And by the way, I love your program. | ||
| Oh, thank you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
You, George, Barbara Nee, and Lynn, listening to you, last seven years. | |
| All right, buddy. | ||
| Thank you very much. | ||
|
unidentified
|
All right, take care. | |
| Keep your head down. | ||
| I always had thought about that. | ||
| You've seen it in many movies, and of course, Nebraska has a number of silos in it. | ||
| And can you imagine walking out to grab your paper one Sunday morning and seeing about a million ICBMs in lift phase, boost phase. | ||
| Wildcard line, you're on the air. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hi. | |
| Hey, that's me. | ||
| That's you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hello, Art. | |
| It's Dave driving his cab about 30 miles northwest of Manhattan. | ||
| And I'm driving right now. | ||
| I hope I'm coming in okay. | ||
| You're coming in fine, buddy. | ||
|
unidentified
|
As I move around, you'll let me know how that changes. | |
| I was on with you May 16th. | ||
| I don't know how silly this might be, but that was the weekend we had a lot of Borealis bombardment. | ||
| Oh, yes. | ||
|
unidentified
|
In a good, stable place, but the call cut off. | |
| You segued out of it just like that was it, meant to be. | ||
| If you remember, I mentioned the Zero Point Field, and you said enthusiastically, do you realize that's our subject tonight, which I did not know, you know? | ||
| Oh, I certainly recall, yes. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| I just want to cap the point that I was talking about two shows, Zero Point Field and Chief Becker, that had really enthused me. | ||
| I wanted to call in, but I really didn't have a tag. | ||
| I was going to be all like on the air and go nowhere. | ||
| You had actually provided that a couple weeks after that. | ||
| Similar to when I called in May, we were having magnetosphere troubles. | ||
| And this was a couple weeks after those two shows. | ||
| It got me so enthused. | ||
| And you came on on a Sunday night saying, boy, last night the signal was terrible. | ||
| I travets. | ||
| I moaned. | ||
| I cried. | ||
| And tonight it's cleared up. | ||
| Yes. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And you said, well, geez, what did I do? | |
| I recognize that. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| Just to tie it into the field, I would just like to propose that your listenership may have had something to do with that. | ||
| You, in talking about it the night before, I'm sure many, many of us, you know, kind of focused on the situation. | ||
| And I just thought maybe that might have had something to do with it. | ||
| I just wanted to put that idea out there, capping off where I started about a month ago. | ||
| All right, I've got it. | ||
| Well, you can't, look, it's entirely possible. | ||
| You know, who knows what happens when you fling an idea out over a radio program like this, where you're reaching millions and millions of people, even if you're not trying to suggest an experiment and not trying to suggest thought en masse in any certain pattern, the mere suggestion of considering the item itself may be sufficient to affect it. | ||
| These are all things that I'm considering, and that's just virtually what that man was saying. | ||
| That perhaps the mere introduction of the fact that the idea that our magnetosphere was getting clobbered the most important thing that I've talked about on the air in all these years I've been on the air, there's no question. | ||
| And here we have a guest, Professor William A. Tiller, who has hard evidence of the effect of intent, the absolute fact of effect of consciousness. | ||
| It is astounding stuff, no less than astounding stuff. | ||
| Now, I don't want to get lost in the minutia of the physics of what we're talking about, although I will ask where appropriate. | ||
| And I think there is a danger that we could get lost in that minutia. | ||
| But the overarching, archingly important fact is that this whole consciousness thing is as real as a heart attack. | ||
| In street parlance, this is heavy stuff, folks. | ||
| More of it in a moment. | ||
| Music Yes, so monumental, I don't want to get lost in the minutiae. | ||
| Professor Tiller, welcome back. | ||
| Your first experiments, the ones you described last hour, in the first part of last hour, including measuring the size of the field, is just incredible to me. | ||
| Incredible. | ||
| A million questions. | ||
| For example, did you attempt to measure the effect of positive intent on any given object or any effect versus negative intent? | ||
| Well, you're going to have to talk up good and loud. | ||
| That's a complicated issue. | ||
| I know. | ||
| We have seen such effects. | ||
| They would be called the experimenter effect. | ||
| Someone with a positive attitude who's very emotionally committed to the work, things work much better in that circumstance. | ||
| Someone who is negative, it doesn't work as well. | ||
| But, you know, we mentioned the analogy earlier to magic because it's so far beyond our Understanding. | ||
| There are witches, stay with me, Professor, that I interview, who claim that negative intent, if applied correctly, can be as powerful as positive intent, period. | ||
| That it is only an ability, a force, or whatever it is we end up describing this thing as, and it can be used negatively just as easily as positively. | ||
| I think that that's probably true at some, maybe even most levels. | ||
| Certainly physics is neutral in the sense that... | ||
| It is how we use these things that makes the difference. | ||
| So, yes, this is an area of physics that will have positive benefits of great order and potentially negative benefits if people misuse. | ||
| So one has to be very careful. | ||
| We know, for example, that our government sponsored a program through the CIA to look at what remote viewers do, and they did that for, you know, 20 years. | ||
| Right, exactly. | ||
| I have my dear friend, and you know him as well, Ingo Swan. | ||
| In fact, he said to say hello to you. | ||
| I know Ingo quite well. | ||
| Yes, indeed. | ||
| What an incredible, incredible individual he is. | ||
| I think of Ingo as a Leonardo of our age. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Uh-huh. | |
| Well, if our government, for obvious reasons, was interested in remote viewing, and they obviously were, then something along the lines of what you're discussing proof of tonight would be of indescribable wealth to them, it would seem to me, as a source of a potential, well, I'm not sure what, but you know damn well it'd have military applications somehow. | ||
| Yeah, and I'm cautious about that. | ||
| Very cautious. | ||
| But it is part of the future unfoldment of humankind to have the potential to misuse and to grow enough in consciousness not to misuse. | ||
| Do you believe that consciousness may save the human race one way or the other, ultimately end up saving or who knows, even destroying the human race? | ||
| I think that that is indeed true. | ||
| It's the crux of the matter. | ||
| I have my own personal definition of consciousness, although I cannot prove it yet. | ||
| We're not at that place. | ||
| Well, if it's understandable, lay it out. | ||
| Okay, to me, consciousness is a byproduct of spirit entering dense matter. | ||
| Now, what it means is that as we grow and develop, as we go to school, as we play sports, as we get involved in social activities, we build infrastructure at the various levels of ourselves, the deeper levels, the emotion domain, the mind domain, etc. | ||
| And spirit seems to need infrastructure to attach to. | ||
| And therefore, the more we build that, then the more spirit that enters. | ||
| And therefore, the byproduct is more consciousness. | ||
| And if you're more conscious, you see more opportunities and variations than you did before. | ||
| And so the possibilities become richer. | ||
| And you pursue those, and you grow more and more and more. | ||
| And more and more spirit enters, and you become more and more conscious. | ||
| And so you begin to see beyond what we are presently seeing on the average. | ||
| We begin to see that not only do we need worthy goals for the future, but we need to use right means, worthy means to those goals, because the process that we use to gain our goals actually changes the future. | ||
| And we and our children and our grandchildren must live in that future. | ||
| And so right now, Professor, many people in the world have a very negative outlook on the future. | ||
| And if they're asked by survey people, they think their children will not live as good a life as they are now living. | ||
| In other words, they think things are going to get worse. | ||
| And I wonder if that has the danger of becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. | ||
| Well, I think that's right. | ||
| I mean, Casey said that the people who worry about earthquakes ultimately create them. | ||
| Exactly. | ||
| Exactly. | ||
| We are creating our future, I think, all the time. | ||
| And so what we do with our consciousness leads us into that future. | ||
| And so we have to grow to the level of consciousness where we become aware of these things and we choose not to do them. | ||
| And of course, the big stumbling block is to reach the stage where you're willing to surrender your individual ego to the larger ego of the race. | ||
| And that's a real stumbling block for much of humanity. | ||
| But I think that's the path forward for our individual and collective development. | ||
| Now, the physics that we presently have that's created the technology that has with it, of course, wondrous things, but it has problems. | ||
| It has created a lot of problems in the world. | ||
| The new technology that will grow out of the things I'm talking about, which utilize consciousness, can enhance all the technologies that we have in the world and create new ones. | ||
| But we must grow in consciousness to properly be able to use these things. | ||
| Professor, I take it that you are monitoring parallel work being done, for example, at Princeton. | ||
| Yes, I know Bob John and Roger Nelson and all of them. | ||
| You well know about the human consciousness and their device and such. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| And it turns out that we find that our conditioned space is a very sensitive detector of biofield emissions from human. | ||
| Would you describe a computer spitting out random numbers as a conditioned space? | ||
| No, but a conditioned space can definitely influence the random number generators in it. | ||
| So we've done those kinds of experiments. | ||
| They are all published in Conscious Acts of Creation. | ||
| All right. | ||
| Looking at what they are doing, though, at Princeton, they seem to get indications that start bumping off the scale prior to an event. | ||
| Yes, and we see that as well. | ||
| In time. | ||
| Now, that suggests that the effect transcends time in some manner. | ||
| Well, and the issue you see that's important for people to come to grips with is that, and we had to do this in relativity theory, you had to convert time into a fourth spatial dimension. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| And that's one point to keep in mind. | ||
| The second one is there is information entanglement between different places in three-dimensional space. | ||
| But if you've converted time into a fourth spatial dimension, as we do mathematically for relativity theory, then it turns out information entanglement occurs in time, both backwards and forwards. | ||
| So information entanglement is not bound by time, might be another way to put it. | ||
| Right, it would be another way to put it, and therefore to see the precursors of events ahead of time, I think, is very doable in our future. | ||
| Well, it apparently is. | ||
| That's what Princeton seems to be proving. | ||
| And remember I asked you earlier, do you have any hints of the nature of the communication involved in this entanglement business? | ||
| How is it achieved? | ||
| Well, okay, now we get into the I have to start bringing in some theoretical modeling that I have done relative. | ||
| Let me go first relative to this, what we've discovered. | ||
| First thing is to make this step where you have two levels to physical reality. | ||
| You have our normal atom molecule level and you have the coarsest level of the physical vacuum where magnetic monopoles seem to function. | ||
| All right? | ||
| Maybe. | ||
| Well, it means it's another kind of stuff. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| But it's a kind of stuff that can be influenced by intent and mind. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| All right? | ||
| So but it turns in the model that I use, you see, now we start getting out we have to change our reference frame. | ||
| The reference frame that's appropriate for the atom molecule level of reality is space-time. | ||
| But the reference frame for the coarse physical vacuum level of reality is not space-time. | ||
| It is something different. | ||
| And so I have proposed a duplex space made of two subspaces, one of which is space-time, but the other is its reciprocal. | ||
| Now, the reciprocal of a distance is number per unit distance, which is a frequency, spatial frequency. | ||
| The reciprocal of time is number per unit time, which is a temporal frequency. | ||
| So you're starting to jump over my head. | ||
| I understood a vibrational frequency, right? | ||
| Yes, and so let's just say, I'm saying that the proper reference frame for the stuff going on in the physical, the coarse physical vacuum, is a frequency domain. | ||
| But a frequency domain is not limited by distance or time. | ||
| Why not? | ||
| Because there are no boundaries in terms of frequencies that we know of. | ||
| I mean, there is zero and there is infinity, but you don't have distance limitations. | ||
| And so if I say I think the proper reference frame for viewing nature is a duplex space of this nature, of these two reciprocal subspaces, and somehow what our intention put into a device does, | ||
| that conditions a space, that conditioning of the space and all the equipment in it, by the way, somehow acts to couple these two aspects of physical reality together. | ||
| But it does so with a speed of communication that can't be measured because it's probably not measurable. | ||
| It's instant, right? | ||
| No, I don't like infinities, and I don't like instantly. | ||
| It's probably very, very large compared to the velocity of light. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| And so our measurement instruments at the moment are not adequate to distinguish. | ||
| But I think it's really in the measurement system that the limitation is. | ||
| And when one says, you see, when you say instantaneous, then you've thrown all the physics away. | ||
| Yeah, that's true. | ||
| So essence, let's just say very, very large or very, very small. | ||
| I mean, those kinds of things are, you can deal with them. | ||
| From your point of view, it has to have a number. | ||
| Damn it. | ||
| Well, I mean, ultimately, it has to have a number. | ||
| Well, maybe. | ||
| That's just the way it is. | ||
| And so the point is that you can connect from the atom molecule level of our reality into the frequency domain. | ||
| And it turns out that that's this coupling that occurs because of these intention devices. | ||
| And also with that reference frame, it says that a quality, any quality has two parts. | ||
| It has a part from the atom molecule level of reality, and it has a part from the coarse physical vacuum level of reality. | ||
| But if this coupling coefficient between the two is incredibly small as it is in our normal reality, then you never get to see what's going on in this coarse physical vacuum level. | ||
| However, as the coupling coefficient gets bigger, then that contribution to a measurement increases. | ||
| And that's what we're seeing in our property measurements. | ||
| So I'm saying now then as the coupling coefficient, it says that there are two parts. | ||
| And there's sort of a part in the one space, and it has a conjugate in the other space. | ||
| So in the mathematics of this kind of a reference frame, what it does is it says that there is a mathematical connection between these two conjugates. | ||
| So if you have something in the atom molecule level, let's say an object of some shape, then there is a driving force to create its conjugate in the coarse physical vacuum level, and that can happen if the coupling coefficient between the two is reasonably large. | ||
| I see you're getting way down the road from what I'm able to do. | ||
| I'm sort of half grasping at that. | ||
| All right, so let me just say that there is a way to get into this coarse physical vacuum level, and once you've built that conjugate, it is everywhere. | ||
| And from our point of view, instants. | ||
| In space-time. | ||
| Yes, it would appear that way. | ||
| And so you have point A and point B, which may be many thousands of miles apart. | ||
| You can enter it at A using one of these devices. | ||
| You build the conjugate. | ||
| The conjugate wants, if you've got the equipment also at place B, it wants to build the conjugate of itself, and so it starts to increase the coupling at that point, and lo and behold, you have information transfer between the two points. | ||
| Anyway, that's what our... | ||
| It's a little bit too early in the process because there is another complication. | ||
| I keep pulling them on you. | ||
| But the other complication is that the mathematics that indicate something about this coarse physical vacuum suggests that everything there goes faster than light. | ||
| Okay, and now you've got a problem. | ||
| Relativity theory says that you can't interact across the light barrier. | ||
| That's correct. | ||
| However, if there is a higher dimensional frame of reference beyond space-time, like in my case, the emotion domain or the mind domain, and if there's a substance in that domain, it's outside of relativity theory, and that substance may be able to go slower than light and faster than light. | ||
| Got it. | ||
| And therefore, it can interact with the electric slower-than-light stuff and the magnetic faster-than-light stuff. | ||
| And so now what you begin to see, you can see an electric particle with a halo of this stuff. | ||
| I have to call it deltrons, around it going slower than light. | ||
| And you can see a faster-than-light moiety. | ||
| I don't know whether it's a, I think it's more a wave-like, but it's more complex. | ||
| All right. | ||
|
unidentified
|
All right. | |
| All right, I think we're going to try and take the blackboard away from Professor here. | ||
| Professor, several years ago, as a talk show host, I'm, you know, in this unique, really neat position on the one hand where you're speaking with millions of people. | ||
| So I decided, you know, I really do believe there is something to this consciousness intent effect business. | ||
| I don't know how it hit me, and I forget why it hit me, but I decided, what the hell? | ||
| Let's do an experiment. | ||
| And we did a whole series of them, Professor. | ||
| And what we tried to do was to affect weather systems. | ||
| And we went for areas, oh, I don't know, like in Texas or in British Columbia where they were having forest fires and they had no rain. | ||
| They were drought-stricken areas. | ||
| And I had people during breaks really just turn the radio down and concentrate as hard as they could on picturing water beginning to coalesce, becoming clouds, making rain in these specific areas. | ||
| Now, You visualize it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, except I've got millions of people doing it. | |
| And so I did this. | ||
| And so damned if it didn't work. | ||
| And when I say work, I mean within an hour or within two hours, rain clouds formed where they should not have been, where they were not forecast to be, and from them poured rain. | ||
| Now, you know, just, I'm sure like with your experiments, Professor, when you stumble into this and you realize, oh my God, it's real. | ||
| I don't know what it is, but it's real. | ||
| As these experiments went on, it dawned on me that it really was the solid gold. | ||
| It was the real McCoy. | ||
| And then I started thinking, as any normal person I would think would, about the implications of what I was doing. | ||
| And, of course, I was tampering around with large complex systems like the weather. | ||
| And so I said, you know, this is not so smart because I really don't know the ramifications of what I'm doing. | ||
| And I stopped. | ||
| And I started talking to the people at Princeton. | ||
| And they said, yes, perhaps that was wise to have stopped because you don't know what you're doing. | ||
| Well the issue is we have an awful lot to learn in this kind of area and so it's better to work with simpler systems, smaller systems. | ||
| That's why I've done the kind of experiments I've done. | ||
| Does it surprise you though that they work? | ||
| It doesn't surprise me. | ||
| And the reason is from our experience, this coarse physical vacuum level of reality in fact is the precursor to the atom molecule level of reality. | ||
| That is that what goes into that level, the first level, which can be intent, mind, etc., that causes change in the physics relating to the atom molecule level from where we stand now with our experiments. | ||
| We can influence things both locally and non-locally by working at that deeper level. | ||
| Professor, a next obvious step for you would be to have others attempt to replicate your experiments. | ||
| Have you done that? | ||
| We have done it with respect to the simplest experiment, which is changing the pH, the pH of water going up by one pH. | ||
| That's fine. | ||
| And so we started, we took four, well, really five sites in the U.S. A site, our major site was here in Payson, Arizona, and then was a site in Missouri and a site in Kansas, and then a site in Baltimore and Bethesda. | ||
| Who were you getting involved in all this work? | ||
| The people who owned the sites. | ||
| I mean, they were basically medical practitioners or scientists, basically. | ||
| And what we did, we started to use the Missouri and Kansas and Payson site for the first beginning experiment with IIEDs. | ||
| And we set up control sites within 2 to 20 miles from each of these, where there was no IIEDs, but the same equipment. | ||
| We had the equipment delivered from the factory to these sites and purified water delivered. | ||
| And we gave them instructions as to how to do the experiment. | ||
| And we asked them to send then the data to us. | ||
| In fact, even send it by snail mail rather than email. | ||
| We didn't want much digital interaction. | ||
| Okay, and the results? | ||
| The results were that we found that the pH went up exponentially with time, and the amplitude increased to 1 pH unit at each of these three sites. | ||
| But surprisingly, it also increased the same way at the control sites where there were no IIEDs. | ||
| All right, and again, so the audience understands, 1 pH, the likelihood of that is what? | ||
| I mean, it's a huge. | ||
| I mean, the issue, our measurement accuracy is 1 100th. | ||
| To have that possibility occur in nature, I probably couldn't even calculate how improbable it is. | ||
| It's determined by the local CO2 concentration and the temperature at the site. | ||
| And let's just say it's very improbable that it would happen by any kind of random process. | ||
| And then, anyway, so the thing is we saw information entanglement between the IIED sites and the non-IIED sites. | ||
| You've measured it, yes. | ||
| We've measured it, and then we thought, okay, let's use the Baltimore and Bethesda sites as control sites for these first three. | ||
| So we had the equipment running there, but no IIEDs. | ||
| And within two months, the same kind of phenomenon was occurring there. | ||
| We get exponentially changing pH, increasing to one pH unit up. | ||
| And then it turns out we were contacted by people in Europe, first a group, young people in the UK, and then a group three months later in Milan, Italy. | ||
| And so we decided, okay, we told them what equipment to buy, and we said, just gather background data. | ||
| We'll use the U.S. control sites for the U.S. sites. | ||
| It turns out then that within three weeks in the site near London, England, the pH went up by one full pH unit. | ||
| And when the Milan site came online three months later, and they did the same sort of thing, it turns out the pH went up one pH unit within one week. | ||
| So now the entanglement has stretched 6,000 miles from the Payson site. | ||
| So it was an incredible kind of result. | ||
| And what it seems to be is that it seems to go much more when the individuals are excited and positive about the work, it goes extremely well. | ||
| Well, that's the force of intent, right? | ||
| It's the force of intent. | ||
| Now, we did find a very interesting thing about this. | ||
| When the sites were at ground level, pH went up one pH unit. | ||
| When they were three stories up in the air, as they were in Baltimore and Bethesda, it went up to 0.8 pH units. | ||
| And when it was below ground, as it was in the control site for Missouri and the Milan site, it went up 1.7 units. | ||
| So it seemed to indicate that this energy, whatever it prefers to go through the Earth than through the air, which is just opposite to electromagnetism, which prefers to go through the air than through the Earth. | ||
| It prefers to go through the Earth. | ||
| Oh, that's fascinating. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes. | |
| So that's sort of where we are on that. | ||
| We have indeed replicated that result and then found this most interesting information entanglement thing. | ||
| It's very robust. | ||
| Any idea at all why it would prefer the Earth as a medium to travel? | ||
| Well, in the theory which I've written up, it is a part of that. | ||
| The stuff that goes faster than light, we had earlier experience, some experiments way back in the first book, which was the Science and Human Transformation book, that this other energy prefers, when it enters dense matter, it speeds up. | ||
| Whereas normal light, normal electromagnetic energy, when it enters dense matter like a prism, it slows down. | ||
| Okay, that tells us something, a little hint at least, I guess, about the nature of it, right? | ||
| Right. | ||
| It indeed suggests it. | ||
| I mean, there's a lot of experiments to sort of prove it, but it definitely suggests that we're dealing with it's kind of a mirror image. | ||
| It's a relationship to electromagnetic energy, and if it is indeed magnetic monopoles, then it means magnetic currents generating electric fields rather than electric currents generating magnetic fields. | ||
| It would have to have a different, it would have to have its own kind of photon, just as electromagnetism has its own kind of photon, but it goes faster than light. | ||
| And now, if you have something from an even higher dimension that can interact with this, then you would have a halo around the faster-than-light stuff as well as around the slower-than-light stuff, and you would see an interaction from halo to halo. | ||
| And that is what would be interpreted as dark matter or dark energy, because you cannot detect the things that are going faster than light, but you can see the effect of that on things that go slower than light. | ||
| I once said to my audience that I thought that a fairly complete understanding of consciousness, if we ever got it, might prove it to be a bigger power than atomic energy, bigger power than There's no doubt about it. | ||
| In fact, maybe the ultimate power. | ||
| If you just let me refer back to this number calculation that I tried to do for you earlier, the energy that consciousness can interact with is so vast, I mean, it beggars everything we know about atomic energy and fusion reactions and such. | ||
| Those are trivial compared to this other. | ||
| And, of course, this is what you learned from the Upanishads and all the ancient teachings, spiritual teachings, of the tremendous capacity that is involved with consciousness and the deeper levels of reality. | ||
| All right, now that you've done these experiments, made these measurements, what is your next goal? | ||
| Is your goal simply to have the scientific community understand and grasp what you've done, or do you keep moving ahead? | ||
| I keep moving ahead because the scientific community is stuck, and the university community is stuck. | ||
| But they're not stuck when it comes to repeatability and to evidence truly put at their feet. | ||
| They can't be that stuck. | ||
| Well, I'm sorry that the majority of them are in the sense that if they can't understand it within the frame of reference that they're familiar with, then to them it can't exist. | ||
| That's the unfortunate issue. | ||
| Except that in science, you're forced to accept something that's documentable and repeatable, and it moves from theory to hard fact. | ||
| And how can they not accept that? | ||
| Look, that happens with the change of every paradigm. | ||
| It takes a long, long time for the paradigm to shift. | ||
| Because people don't want to accept something that they don't understand, especially academicians and scientists who know so much about most of nature, much of nature. | ||
| If properly understood, then there would be almost no boundary to what society, what the world could do for itself. | ||
| But that would take such a giant change. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| It's really the big change is the change in worldview, the change in mindset. | ||
| Exactly. | ||
| And you've got to get outside the box. | ||
| And I'm saying when I say the conventional science is stuck, it's stuck in the box. | ||
| The box of conventional quantum mechanics and space-time is the only reference frame and those limitations I mentioned in the very beginning. | ||
| I would love to help them get out of that. | ||
| But all I can do is go forward and do experiments and publish. | ||
| Absolutely, but, Professor, when you do publish something like that, and it shows all the hard, cold facts, the... | ||
| Granted, they have to read it, but an even half-honest academician of some sort is going to have to say, okay, we've really got something here. | ||
| I mean, even half-honest. | ||
| Well, the issue is that it is not possible to get this kind of work published in conventional scientific journals because the editor will say and has said to me on many occasions, I'm sure our readership wouldn't be interested in this kind of material. | ||
| And so therefore I publish wherever I can and I write these books. | ||
| And all of the data and all the information is in these books. | ||
| All right. | ||
| And your latest book is Science Adventures with Real Mathematics. | ||
| And that one I've tried to write with a minimum of mathematics. | ||
| That helps. | ||
| Yes, that helps. | ||
| Although, you know what, it's kind of a two-edged sword. | ||
| On the one hand, you have people making claims without substance. | ||
| You make claims and then supply more substance than most of us can digest, but enough so that I know you're for real. | ||
| Well, maybe I should tell people how they could access these books. | ||
| Be my guest. | ||
| They can call from the U.S. toll-free to 888-281-5170. | ||
| And for international callers, they need to call 620-229-8979. | ||
| Or they could go and visit my website, www.tiller.org, and this information and lots of other stuff will be able to get it. | ||
| I think we've got a link up on the website. | ||
| Have you managed to get this across the desk of any person of note yet? | ||
| Not really. | ||
| They're, well, I shouldn't say not of note. | ||
| I have many people of note who are thrilled with it, but they're already the converted. | ||
| But you see, this is not an item of faith that we're talking about. | ||
| No, exactly. | ||
| It's a matter of hard fact with your experiments. | ||
| Well, yes, but let me tell you the naivete that I had when I started down this path in parallel with my conventional science at Stanford. | ||
| I was a world-class expert in the area of the science of crystallization, and basically people, my work was highly regarded, the conventional work. | ||
| And so I naively thought that if I do this other and I do it with the same kind of excellence and care to attention and such, then people will begin to pay attention to it. | ||
| But surprise, surprise. | ||
| Surprise, surprise. | ||
| They thought, Tiller's all right over here, but he must be a little sick because he's doing all this other stuff and it's just crazy. | ||
| I can't understand it. | ||
| No kidding. | ||
| Yeah. | ||
| Well, again, it is what it is. | ||
| It is as magic. | ||
| So I guess there's that. | ||
| But still, when you get down to the true, honest-to-God, scientific, experimental proof that you do have, it demands that the data that we now have that's in these books will slowly make a change. | ||
| There's no doubt of it in my mind. | ||
| It just occurs more slowly than I would like. | ||
| Well, you've filled in a few blanks for me about some of it that I certainly didn't know. | ||
| I certainly didn't know about the through the earth part that it was. | ||
| Yeah, that was a surprise to us, too. | ||
| Was it? | ||
| Oh, yes, absolutely. | ||
| I should have thought of it, but I didn't think of it. | ||
| And we just pulled it out of the data, and then, of course, it fell in place with an experiment that I'd done with young children a long, long, long time ago, back in the 70s. | ||
| Well, when we get back, I'd like the audience an opportunity to ask questions, but we do understand that it is occurring. | ||
| And I think that on this program, over the years, with a series of guests and perhaps ill-advised experiments, we have proven, along with Princeton and all the others doing this kind of work right now, that there is a power, and it's a definite, real power. | ||
| It's now a measurable power. | ||
| In other words, the actual power of it, the field, the size of the field can be measured. | ||
| So we're getting down to some real nitty-gritty in terms of the world of consciousness. | ||
| just remember it was here Humanity's fate may be in its own hands. | ||
| That may be the bottom line to all of this. | ||
| Humanity's fate may be in its own hands. | ||
| We just don't know it yet. | ||
| Brian in Orlando, Florida says, hey, Art, my brain feels like a set of bowling pins and the good doctor is the bowling ball. | ||
| Got any, et cetera? | ||
| Yeah, Brian, I know what you mean. | ||
| But here's the thing. | ||
| We, I think, I say collectively, we, so many of us listening to this program right now, know this is true. | ||
| We know this is fact, that there really is something here. | ||
| And here comes Professor Tiller with a lot of very hard proof and a lot of it dispensed to us in the language of physics that other people at his level would understand. | ||
| And we might not necessarily, I did not certainly follow it all, but the hard numbers behind the experiments that it seems to me are irrefutable. | ||
| I mean, irrefutable in terms of what they prove, very hard for anybody to ignore. | ||
| If you would like his latest book, which he claims he held the math to a minimum in, it's Some Science Adventures in Real Magic. | ||
| And you can order it. | ||
| Let me do it the right way here by reading you the number here in the good old US of A at 888-281-5170. | ||
| That's 888-281-5170. | ||
| People need to get these publications and get them into the hands of other scientists who need to begin also doing experiments like this. | ||
| Or outside the country, the number is 620-229-8979. | ||
| That's 620-229-8979. | ||
| I got that right, didn't I? | ||
| You got it perfectly. | ||
| Yeah, good. | ||
| I'm going to introduce you now to the audience, which will probably slow you down a little bit, which is a good thing. | ||
| Probably is. | ||
| Here we go. | ||
| Let's see what's on their minds. | ||
| First time caller line, you're on the air with Professor Tiller. | ||
| Hi. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hello? | |
| Is that me? | ||
| That's you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| Thank you, Mr. Bell, for taking my call. | ||
| Professor Tiller, can you hear me all right? | ||
| I can indeed. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| Your experiments are definitely amazing. | ||
| And I have a two-part question that hopefully you won't be as reluctant to answer as you've seen to be on some of Mr. Bell's questions. | ||
| But my question concerns your meditators. | ||
| The first part, have you measured the brainwave states and which is the best for imprinting, whether it's the beta, alpha, theta, or delta? | ||
| And the second part of the question: what type of meditation are you basically using to imprint the information? | ||
| Is it a visual meditation or using a sound meditation? | ||
| Thank you very much, and I'll take my answer off the air. | ||
| All right. | ||
| With regard to the brainwave state, did you do measurement in that area? | ||
| We did not do any measurement in that area. | ||
| That's sort of in the future kind of thing. | ||
| That's the kind of thing that would occur somewhat far down the road. | ||
| Basically, the answer to the second question, my wife and I began meditation by learning the Edgar Casey technique that the people from Virginia Beach talk about. | ||
| And this was back in the early 1960s, and it's a very simple one. | ||
| we've transformed it so much over time that it's unrecognizable, but that's where we began. | ||
| So you believe you have advanced it to a more efficient, effective... | ||
| Do you think that's just tailoring it to you specifically or a general advance? | ||
| No, I think it's tailoring it to us specifically, and it optimizes for us, because we're evolving all the time. | ||
| And so this seems, again, intuitively or led to making various kinds of changes because you more quickly get to the state where the house lights go up very, very brightly inside fairly quickly. | ||
| All right. | ||
| Wildcard line, you're on the air with Professor Tiller. | ||
| Hi. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hello. | |
| Hello. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes, Professor, you are amazing. | |
| I had studied very briefly Edgar Casey before, but moving on, the two questions I have specifically concerning to define and then condition the environment, and also what was the quite catch you. | ||
| Either did I. What is your question about conditioning the environment? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yeah, I was just concerned about the conditioned environment. | |
| How do you define and then how do you condition it? | ||
| Okay. | ||
| Hold on, hold on. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And then backwards. | |
| No, no, no. | ||
| Caller, hold on. | ||
| Professor, how do you condition the environment? | ||
| Well, the way which we condition a space is to use an IID with a particular intention. | ||
| IID is what? | ||
| This intention imprinted electrical device, this simple device I talked about. | ||
| In the beginning, okay. | ||
| In the beginning. | ||
| And basically, for example, when we wanted to condition the laboratory here, I built a new laboratory in Payson when we moved here from Stanford back in 1998. | ||
| And the intention that we used was that the laboratory be lifted to a higher electromagnetic gauge symmetry state, as high as possible, and to be tuned so that any psychoenergetic experiment conducted in the laboratory would be robustly successful. | ||
| In other words, it was a blast of intent, Color. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The intent. | |
| Conditioning, that environment, yes. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The intent. | |
| So now, this is really basic. | ||
| As an electronics technician, the EE problems that you influenced, obviously, yes. | ||
| Were they basically empty or like all zeros or all ones when you started? | ||
| Well, we didn't check that kind of thing till later, but we did have an electrical engineer look at that, and there was some random, little bit of random stuff, but not much, and it changed while it was conditioning a space. | ||
| I mean, you could see those numbers changing, and we have to do a lot more work on that at this point in time because we don't understand enough, and we want to design a better device. | ||
| So that is an important point, but we don't have enough information for me to give you really good hard data. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Professor, let me say that there's nothing like the power of positive thinking, first of all. | |
| And second of all, when you talk about magic, I mean, science and magic are two different. | ||
| There is no magic. | ||
| It's all science. | ||
| It's all science, but it is. | ||
| The dilemma is if it's well beyond the prevailing paradigm. | ||
| Might as well be science. | ||
| Magic. | ||
| Yes, you really have to use those words because only then can you understand why people are rubbing their heads so much and that they can't really accept it easily. | ||
| Because to them, they're stuck in a particular mindset and they just have to look at it as magic. | ||
| They just can't believe it. | ||
| That's the problem. | ||
| But it's a very human thing, I believe. | ||
| Perhaps so, but again, if there is evidence at the level that you claim. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Right. | |
| Yes, and we have really substantial evidence for all of this now. | ||
| It goes with the work at Princeton, Professor. | ||
| It seems to me that you would have some reason to communicate with Princeton and any others doing work in this field. | ||
| I mean, remember the plant experiments? | ||
| Yeah, sure, with Cleve Axer. | ||
| Absolutely, yes. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| No, I agree. | ||
| I communicate with all of these people. | ||
| And so we're, in fact, I'm happy to hear that. | ||
| Yeah, Bob John is reading my new book right now. | ||
| Okay. | ||
| East of the Rockies, you're on the air with Professor Tiller. | ||
| Hi. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Good morning, Art and Professor Tiller. | |
| Hi. | ||
|
unidentified
|
A waft of names have come to mind with regard to the work you've cited. | |
| Warner Heisenberg and his uncertainty principle, John Bell and his extrapolations of the EPR paradox and action at a distance, Brian Josephson and his application of the Josephson junction for squid technology, Evan Harris Walker, mathematical modeling or content Carl Brigham. | ||
| Let me revert back to Brian Josephson and his attempt to measure bioelectromagnetic phenomena. | ||
| And you mentioned high-gauge developments with regard to the intention in printed electrical devices. | ||
| If we were to go beyond the SQUID, which is state-of-the-art for non-invasive measurement of bioelectromagnetic phenomena and cognition, where do we go now in terms of the kinds of sensitivity we want to depict those subtle aspects that someone like Roger Penrose would be looking at? | ||
| Well, the SQUID and all of that, that's at the U1 electromagnetic gauge symmetry state, which really means that the U1 is that you have one internal space variable, which is the phase angle of the electron wave function. | ||
| Take that color. | ||
| But our experiments show that we not only have that level, but we access magnetic monopole level. | ||
| And in exotic physics, the only place you see these electric monopole stuff and magnetic monopole stuff coexisting is at the SU2 level, where the internal symmetry spaces has to have two variables. | ||
| And one is the electron wave function, and the other would be the magnetic monopole wave function in a perpendicular plane. | ||
| I'm going to have to take this caller away from you, Professor. | ||
| Sorry. | ||
| Okay, but... | ||
|
unidentified
|
Because it's just that... | |
| Let me say one other thing I won't be technical. | ||
| It is that these spatial oscillations, which are global in a laboratory, are very reminiscent of the Josephson effect. | ||
| The frequency regions that we see, we see these oscillations are in the range of 1 100th of a hertz to 1 100th of a hertz. | ||
| Very, very low frequency. | ||
| Well, I'll say. | ||
| And we've almost never looked down there. | ||
| It's a good point. | ||
| We've almost never looked down there. | ||
| It also would be a frequency that would traverse the Earth just like a hot knife through butter. | ||
| Well, that kind of thing is true. | ||
| And so the gentleman who was talking about brainwaves and stuff, we never looked down even below 2 Hertz because it takes an awful lot of data to make meaningful sense of things. | ||
| You're here. | ||
| Welcome to the Rockies. | ||
| You're on the air with Professor Tiller. | ||
| Hi. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes, hi. | |
| A few years ago, I accomplished something that truly seemed magical/slash scientific. | ||
| And I was wondering if the professor might be able to comment on how I might be able to increase my chances of pulling this off again. | ||
| Well, since we don't know what you did. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I'm going to tell you what I did. | |
| Shoot. | ||
| I do medical research consulting and find alternatives for people's problems when they don't want to go the conventional route. | ||
| And I myself developed a serious condition that usually is made worse by surgery, and I just couldn't find an answer, you know, just searching worldwide. | ||
| So I got an idea. | ||
| I made myself a makeshift Ouija board and asked for a name and phone number of just, you know, some help. | ||
| And I literally got a name and number of a specialist one in 20 in the United States that I was unable to find. | ||
| And it panned out, saved my life. | ||
| And I was stunned. | ||
| And it felt like a window of time opened up where this was possible. | ||
| And I haven't been able to do it again, but it was so stunningly accurate that. | ||
| All right. | ||
| I think we both get it. | ||
| And I don't have any difficulty with that. | ||
| find that if you're open to help from the universe, that you can get it in various ways. | ||
| But as she mentioned, it was sort of a small window of... | ||
| But I would suspect you've got a pretty high level of the unseen to do that. | ||
| You know, Edgar Casey used to be able to go into a trance and say all kinds of things for people. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| And remarkable levels of accuracy over tens of thousands of readings. | ||
| So the potential is there. | ||
| All the answers seem to be available in the universe. | ||
| You have to learn how to access them, which really means that you have to go within. | ||
| You have to build your inner muscles as distinct from the outer muscles. | ||
| And you tune in to these other capabilities because they're present in the universe and it is your subconscious that really accesses them for you. | ||
| And the subconscious will feed you information that it gathers so long as you consider it to be meaningful. | ||
| In your case, you obviously considered it to be very meaningful and important for your life. | ||
| Life and death. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| It doesn't get any more important than that. | ||
| Right. | ||
| And so I think, indeed, that if you begin to look at these kinds of considerations and these kinds of concepts, then you may be able to revisit that in a real practical way. | ||
| Certainly as people develop within, what you're talking about is just a natural consequence of moving from a normal individual to an adept. | ||
| I mean, all of these things are latent human capabilities. | ||
| Got it. | ||
| You've just got to know to grab them when they pass you by. | ||
| On our international line, you're on the air with Professor Tiller. | ||
| Good morning. | ||
| Hello. | ||
| Going once. | ||
| Going twice. | ||
| Gone. | ||
| First time caller line, you're on the air with Professor Tiller. | ||
| Good morning. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hello. | |
| Hi. | ||
| Good morning. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hi. | |
| All right. | ||
| Before this show, I was actually doing some meditating, as you were speaking about just about one minute earlier. | ||
| Yes. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And I don't know, you would probably tell my religion just by this, and I will not tell you my religion, but I received a message that said the devil was memory, And Jesus was a wall of protection against what, your memory? | |
| Against your memory, which ties you down to earthly, you understand, earthly events and feelings. | ||
| And this is reinforced by Al Spensky. | ||
| I don't know if you're consciousness. | ||
| The storage of memory, when disregarded for a couple of days or so, I believe, is when the energy may be transferred, as you say, the information. | ||
| So I don't know if you believe in spiritual. | ||
| You said it's about spiritual. | ||
| Well, he said spiritual, but not necessarily specifically religious. | ||
| I consider myself an extremely spiritual individual, but I don't have much to do with organized religion. | ||
| The only thing is, though, Professor, you have to acknowledge that if what we understand about intent and consciousness is real, as your experiments have proven, that people with great religious faith would pray with incredible intent. | ||
| With incredible intent. | ||
| And so all these studies on prayer that show its effectiveness do nothing but bolster up your entire argument. | ||
| It's all the same thing whether it's religious or not. | ||
| I agree with that. | ||
| And the issue is that my concerns are the dogmas of religions that keep things in a very narrow channel rather than letting them broaden. | ||
| And I also talked about the dogma that's in science, being stuck in the conventional paradigm. | ||
| Fairly common practice. | ||
| There are healers all over the world, and some of them seemingly really heal. | ||
| At any rate, in this woman's case, she was in a small town. | ||
| She was just an average lady in every other way. | ||
| But she could heal. | ||
| And all went along swimmingly until one day somebody in the town said, tell us that your power and what you can do is from God. | ||
| But she couldn't do it. | ||
| They just about burned her at the stake. | ||
| Real power or not real power, magical or not magical, they damn near burned her at the stake because she wouldn't say that her power came from God. | ||
| And with regard to what Professor Tiller is saying tonight, I have a feeling we're going to run into quite a group of people just like that. | ||
| Professor, welcome back. | ||
| Your colleagues at Stanford University, when they became aware of the line of research you were doing, how did you fare? | ||
| And I asked that question knowing that some other very important people who have done sort of off-the-wall, considered to be off-the-wall research, have actually been in danger of losing their tenure and even the position at university. | ||
| I mean, just really getting into big trouble. | ||
| Well, the reality is they would have preferred that I didn't do this kind of thing. | ||
| I did have tenure as a full professor. | ||
| And I did my conventional work, and I had as many PhD students as anyone else. | ||
| But they didn't come after you officially. | ||
| Well, there were no grounds, you see. | ||
| The issue is that so long as you do what you're paid to do, then the other is your private life, yes, right. | ||
| And it was that kind of thing. | ||
| But they would have preferred that I was at some other university because in essence it kind of embarrassed them, I think, in the sense that when they would go to conferences and people would say, ask them, what is this stuff that Tiller's talking about? | ||
| And they couldn't really answer, except that they were bothered by it. | ||
| But again, it's a very human kind of trait, something that's so very different from where their own power base is. | ||
| Now, I sense, maybe it's just me, but I sense, between the kind of work you're doing in Princeton and other works going on right now, that all of this is kind of on the verge of coming out of the closet. | ||
| Well, I think, you know, we've got enough data that there has been a lot of data around. | ||
| You know, I mean, there's been really a lot of data around for more than a century. | ||
| But it's a question of data becoming really robust. | ||
| And now we're getting really robust data. | ||
| They are at Princeton. | ||
| We are as well. | ||
| And then it's really a question of getting some good scientists who are not afraid to go out of the box to really pay attention to this, to really look at it. | ||
| Let me tell you a danger you've got with it. | ||
| And that is that it becomes, I was joking, sort of, but not earlier when I played that bumper music, it could become a new religion. | ||
| Well, I mean, yeah, it can. | ||
| And this is an aspect of consciousness. | ||
| I mean, the point is that if you don't have enough, if your consciousness isn't high enough, then people will want to make a cult or a religion out of it. | ||
| Well, that would be a healthy portion of the population, trust me. | ||
| No, I do trust you, and that is unfortunate. | ||
| It just says where we are as a nation, we have a long way to go. | ||
| But the issue is that This is the kind of science that, well, let me go back one step. | ||
| My goal had been to, from the beginning of this work, to build a reliable bridge of understanding that joins seamlessly with conventional science on one end, goes all the way through the subtle domains and the domains of emotion and mind, and is firmly planted in the bedrock of spirit on the other end. | ||
| And that it would be reliable enough that people would be willing to walk across that bridge. | ||
| Suppose I told you that you're going to have to tell me that this power that you've proven and talked to us about tonight comes from God, or if you don't say that, then you're going to get burned at the stake. | ||
| Well, the issue is because I told you what my bias was in the beginning. | ||
| I have no difficulty with God. | ||
| God and I are on good terms. | ||
| But it's not the current. | ||
| So you are willing to say that this power, this ability, this phenomena comes from God? | ||
| Well, but in what way? | ||
| As far as I'm concerned, everything does. | ||
| That's a safe answer. | ||
| But there's got to be numbers for all this, and there's no numbers for God. | ||
| Well, the issue is we don't know enough. | ||
| I mean, here we are, okay, we're just stepping beyond space-time to another level of reality. | ||
| So you believe God will eventually have an equation? | ||
| Well, I think we will slowly, over the next millennia, build equations for the domains of spirit, pardon me, the domains of emotion and the domains of mind, and we'll get into the domains of spirit. | ||
| So now, God is a concept. | ||
| When I was younger, I had lots of ideas about God, but I realize at this point that I'm not conscious enough really to have a meaningful image of God. | ||
| Right. | ||
| No, I'm with you. | ||
| We're ignoring people, and we can't. | ||
| First time caller line, you're on the air with Professor Tiller. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hi. | |
| Yes, sorry. | ||
| Hi, you're going to have to yell at us. | ||
| You're not talking about it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I'm sorry. | |
| Good morning, gentlemen. | ||
| Professor, I couldn't help but notice that when you were speaking about your meditators imprinting the devices, that you noted two, four, and six individuals were taking in that experiment. | ||
| Yeah, but I haven't studied odd numbers. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I was wondering if there was a particular reason. | |
| Significance to the even numbers. | ||
| Really only that it just happenstance. | ||
| It was all couples and diversity. | ||
| There were two, when the four initial ones, which we published all that data in Conscious Acts of Creation, there were two couples. | ||
| And then when we came here to Arizona and needed to imprint the lab, the other two people weren't available. | ||
| So my wife and I did it alone, and it worked very well. | ||
| Professor? | ||
| Yes, go ahead. | ||
| If you had Ingo Swan there to conduct one of those experiments with, what would you expect? | ||
| Well, Ingo is a really powerful mentalist. | ||
| I'm aware of that. | ||
| And so he would do very well. | ||
| But, you know, Ingo and I, we've been friends a long time, and we've often played bridge together, and he's tried to do Psychic Bridge, and he's terrible at Psychic Bridge. | ||
| He almost deserves rebuttal for that. | ||
| Well, I mean, he'll laugh, and I'd be happy to give him a chance. | ||
| All right. | ||
| You know, the basis to the question was, is, in fact, a more powerful, more disciplined mind, like Ingo's, able to get a significantly statistically result? | ||
| Yes. | ||
| Let's see. | ||
| Let me go back one step. | ||
| In the first book, Science and Human Transformation, I built a device that would respond to energies emitted from a human. | ||
| It was a type of gas discharge device. | ||
| And I found by looking at different people, the people who did best were sort of computer scientists, people who had very sharp, well-defined minds in that. | ||
| Now, if we switch to the business of the meditation, it really is, I think, much more related to the devotion and the integrity that you are putting into it and your caring, your compassion for the whole. | ||
| Those are all the components of intent, yes. | ||
| They are all part of it. | ||
| And so I think I don't know quite how well Ingo would do in this, but I think he could train himself because he has one than the last one. | ||
| Yes, yes. | ||
| Well, I mean, Ingo, in my view, is one of the really great ones. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| Wildcard line, you're on the air with Professor Tiller. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hello. | |
| Hello. | ||
| I was wondering if you were aware of any of the research in group consciousness coming out of Fairfield, Iowa, the Maharishi group? | ||
| Well, I'm aware of some of that work, and I know John Hagelin, and so I respect that work. | ||
| I honor that work. | ||
| I think that they've done some very nice experiments, and they're not unsimilar to the kinds of things that we have done. | ||
| We've taken different targets. | ||
|
unidentified
|
They're trying to take it to the next level. | |
| I don't know if you've heard of Vedic pundits. | ||
| They're trying to take it to the next level, meaning this group consciousness experiment in July. | ||
| What is the next level? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, there's the transcendental meditators. | |
| They meditate for 20 minutes. | ||
| Then there's the yogic flyers, which are supposed to be that much more powerful. | ||
| And then there's the Vedic pundits. | ||
| And there's supposed to be 40,000 of them coming together in one place somewhere in the Ganges in July during this celebration called Guru Parma. | ||
| Were you aware of this experiment? | ||
| No, I'm not aware of it, but I'll look forward to the results with great expectation. | ||
| I know that in India there are groups of Swamis that are doing the kinds of things that we're Doing with these simple little electrical devices. | ||
| I mean, they've built themselves inside sufficiently that they do it. | ||
| And our experiments have shown that the acupuncture meridian chakra system of all humans and probably all vertebrates is at this higher electromagnetic gauge symmetry state. | ||
| So the mind can modulate the qi flowing through that system, and that in turn can drive all the processes of the normal atom and molecule level of reality. | ||
| And if they're coherent enough, of course, they can influence things outside the body. | ||
| I mean, in the first book, again, I did work for about four years with the Institute of Heart Math. | ||
| Isn't the fact, Doctor, that your work has so much in common with the East Indian teachings going to put up another gigantic wall in front of its acceptance? | ||
| Well, in this country. | ||
| Yeah, it might be. | ||
| It seems to have a lot in common with Kabbalah. | ||
| And I've been having contacted by lots and lots of East Indian fellows. | ||
| Exactly. | ||
| And I think that those two, let's say, groups, I think there's very good stuff down those paths. | ||
| In terms of whether it'll be easily assimilated in this country or not, that's another question. | ||
| Answer probably not. | ||
| Well, not quickly. | ||
| And not easily. | ||
| No, not easily. | ||
| East of the Rockies. | ||
| You're on the air with Professor Tiller. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Hi. | |
| Good morning. | ||
| A little louder, please. | ||
| Yes, please. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Is that better? | |
| Better, yes, go ahead. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Professor Tiller, I was wondering, and also real quick, I hope you stay with us. | |
| You know, you dropped out when you come on two days a week. | ||
| And I hope you hang in those two days a week because nobody can compare it to you. | ||
| You're very kind, thank you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Professor Tiller, can you draw a comparison? | |
| It seems to me that quantum physics is exactly what the field of research that you're in is or draw a distinction between the two. | ||
| All right, very good. | ||
| He's exactly right. | ||
| Circles back, and I said that to you, and you said, but, but, but, but. | ||
| He's exactly right, and he's exactly wrong. | ||
| Okay. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| No form of quantum mechanics, as it is presently framed mathematically, can deal with any psychoenergetic process. | ||
| There has been lots of money spent by the military to try to use remote viewing to see over the horizon. | ||
| And it doesn't matter what kind of quantum mechanics they've used, it doesn't work. | ||
| And the issue is that if you look at quantum mechanics, it ties it to space-time. | ||
| That is the mathematical formulation of quantum mechanics. | ||
| And because of that, they have to say that wave-particle duality exists, which is a dichotomy. | ||
| The issue is they really, in the early stages, should have expanded their reference frame to take something else more than space-time, as we're doing now. | ||
| But the key part is, if you want to think about it, think of all of our, in quantum mechanics, all the potential functions are in space and time. | ||
| Now, when you start thinking about consciousness, and there's so much data that shows that it's beyond space and time, you can't even define a potential function for that. | ||
| And therefore, you cannot solve Schrödinger's equation. | ||
| You can't do the kinds of things that are done very well in classical quantum mechanics. | ||
| But when you're talking about psychoenergetic processes and all of humans, they're just full of psychoenergetic processes. | ||
| Our present formulation of quantum mechanics can't touch it. | ||
| Now, let me say, a lot of people who talk about these things, they use quantum mechanics as a vehicle, and it is more hopefulness. | ||
| That's really what they're saying. | ||
| I mean, the way you need to interpret what they're saying is that quantum mechanics should have these capabilities within it. | ||
| And what I'm talking about is, sure, let's expand quantum mechanics in the direction that I'm talking about. | ||
| I'm not for throwing it out. | ||
| I'm just saying it needs terrible expansion, large expansion, because in its basic mathematical formulation, it doesn't go far enough. | ||
| You do understand, Professor, why people see the parallel on the surface. | ||
| Oh, sure. | ||
| Oh, sure. | ||
| I mean, because it turns out that the things that they're applying quantum mechanics to is that once you accept wave-particle duality, you can solve all the mathematics in space-time. | ||
| But I'm saying the non-local forces, the information entanglement, those kinds of things, they're really tapping into this other level, this duplex space level. | ||
| So I'm saying that the mathematics of quantum mechanics at this point in time are convenient, but they will not carry us to where we need to go. | ||
| All right. | ||
| We don't have a lot of time left. | ||
| West of the Rockies, you're on the air with Professor Tiller. | ||
| Good morning. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Good morning, Professor Tiller. | |
| Before I pose my question, I would like to first thank you for your affirmations of the purpose of science tonight, which is to prove the existence of a Creator, not to deny it. | ||
| Yes. | ||
| With that saying, with that being as it is, my question is, it seems from what I heard tonight, from tonight's interview, I have understood that intentions are as a vehicle. | ||
| So sincerity should be the fuel. | ||
| With the right sincere intentions, can we be elevated to a higher state of being? | ||
| And if so, could that be the purpose of intentions to propel us to a higher state of being? | ||
| All right, we're out of time. | ||
| So, Professor? | ||
| It's a good question. | ||
| Intention, to me, is an imprint from the domain of spirit onto the domain of mind, which then goes through all the other levels of reality. | ||
| And We're in this classroom which is like a teaching machine, and so the spirit learns and grows. | ||
| So there's a real connection, but now you're getting my speculation. | ||
| I have no scientific proof of this at this point in time, but I hope to get it before I die. | ||
| And I hope you are able to stay around for a long time, Professor. | ||
| I'm planning on, I just started the fourth quarter, and I'm planning on at least two overtimes. | ||
| What you've done is absolutely mind-boggling. | ||
| It underscores so many other things we've talked about on this program. | ||
| And I don't know, it seems like yourself and some of these others ought to get together in some grand consciousness forum and share your ideas and work. | ||
| I think indeed, and I have no doubt that that will happen as time goes on. | ||
| All right, Professor, I want to thank you for coming on tonight, and you have a wonderful week. | ||
| Thanks, and you too. | ||
| Take care, Professor. | ||
| There you have it. |
Export Selection