Joe Rogan interviews quantum physicist Dr. Amit Goswami, who rejects unverifiable string theory as pseudoscience, instead advocating quantum activism—consciousness-driven solutions to save civilization. Goswami explains non-locality via experiments like Stanford’s 90% accurate remote viewing (Targ & Puthoff) and Cleve Baxter’s discredited but possibly valid plant communication studies, linking these to epigenetics and morphogenetic fields. He critiques Prozac, promoting mind-body medicine—yoga, pranayama, and higher chakras—to sustainably address suppressed emotions tied to survival instincts, arguing science must prioritize observable, human-relevant breakthroughs over abstract math. [Automatically generated summary]
The Joe Rogan Experience Podcast is brought to you by Audible.com.
If you go to Audible.com forward slash Joe, you can get one free audio book and one free month of audible service.
You really should try it out.
It's an amazing service.
They have over a hundred thousand titles.
If you've never tried audiobooks before, it can really transform the way you commute.
It makes being stuck in your car or stuck on a train, it makes it an educational experience.
It can inspire you.
You can Take in some cool fiction.
You can enjoy yourself instead of feeling like a schlub just wasting your life away.
Enrich yourself with Audible.com, freaks.
It's an awesome way to get your learn on.
And if you go there right now, as I said, you can get one free audiobook.
A book I recommend is called The War of Art by Steven Pressfield.
It's an amazing book.
I give it out to people.
I have a stack of them at my house.
It's all about overcoming resistance.
Which is something that holds a lot of us back.
When we procrastinate about things, we feel crappy about it.
But when we get things done, we feel great.
But how many people actually follow through and continue to get things done?
It's not that many, and there's a lot of reasons why.
And Steven Pressfield is a brilliant writer.
And the way he gets into it, it'll sink with your head so quickly, you'll be like...
Oh, that's my issue.
And then from then on, you're always going to know what the issue is immediately when it manifests itself and you'll look at it in a completely different way.
I've told so many people about this book and I've had so many people come back and say, this book completely changed the way I work.
And for creative type folks, it's amazing.
But I think it's amazing for anybody because I think that whole resistance thing and procrastination – I think that sort of plays a part in a lot of people's lives.
I don't think it has anything to do with just being artistic.
He relates it to writing and art and creating things, but I think it probably goes to a lot of different things that you do in life, things that you put your focus towards, things that you enjoy.
Anyway, audible.com forward slash Joe.
We're also brought to you by Onnit.
It's O-N-N-I-T. We've got a lot of new stuff in including club bells and mace balls and of course we have kettle bells and battle ropes and stuff like that.
If you have never heard this podcast you don't know what Onnit is.
It's essentially like a personal performance What we're interested in is all different things that increase athletic performance, different things that increase mental performance, which are called nootropics.
We sell one of those called AlphaBrain.
If you've heard this all before, I swear to God, I don't want to keep saying it like this.
They would help you wield a weapon, but what they are is they're ancient Indian exercises.
These are from...
Boy, they used to do them with hardwoods like hundreds and hundreds of years ago, probably thousands of years ago.
And the awkward shape of them and the balance of them strengthens up your forearms and your grip.
And it's a great exercise as far as like wrestling and hand strength and things along those lines.
Club bells are fantastic.
You'd be surprised at how difficult they are to use.
I only used 25 pounders.
They're that hard to use.
With a 25-pound club belt, I get a serious workout in.
It's real weird.
We look at weights, and we look at lifting weight, and people are all impressed if they can lift 300 pounds, and bench 250. It doesn't really matter if you can't use it.
The stuff that I'm interested in is all different exercises that have been shown to actually increase athletic performance.
What I'm interested in is improving the way your body moves.
That's why we're interested in kettlebells.
That's why we sell the extreme kettlebell cardio DVD. We have many different weights and sizes of kettlebells.
We have medicine balls.
We have wall balls, which are these big giant, also they look like medicine balls.
You throw them against the wall.
And a host of different supplements.
Anything that we've found anywhere that we believe increases performance, increases your mood.
There's a supplement called New Mood that increases your body's ability to produce serotonin.
It has 5-HTP and L-tryptophan in it.
And it's great for your brain.
Check it all out.
Go to onnit.com.
Use the code name ROGAN and you will save 10% off any and all supplements.
This Thursday night, it'll be Brian, Tony Hinchcliffe, who's a hilarious, up-and-coming young comedian, Jason Teeb, who we love to death, a very, very funny guy, Billy Bonnell, our buddy Yoshi.
You can't go wrong with this show.
It's the American Comedy Company.
It's a cool-ass club.
If you've never been there before, it's in San Diego on 6th Street.
I read a lot of your work and it is some very, very fascinating and for a person as dumb as I am, confusing stuff.
The idea of quantum mechanics and just when someone uses the word quantum, do you find that a lot of folks that just eyes glaze over Well, not anymore, because, you know, one of the most complex concepts of quantum physics is quantum leap.
I mean, you know, science fiction language captures it a little bit.
But why do they go in between?
We have to say that they go to the domain of possibility.
That's what quantum physics brings, that reality which it seems to be just this one space-time reality that we call nature.
That is not true.
There is another reality which must be called supernature, transcendent reality, just like the spiritual traditions are saying, just like the psychologists are saying in the turn of the century.
In the 19th century, Freud discovered the concept of unconscious.
Unconscious?
Conscious.
Two levels of reality.
The spiritual traditions are transcendent, imminent.
Again, two levels of reality.
Quantum physics in the 20th century, in the year 1925-26, discovered the same thing.
Three times the charm.
This time we better observe the idea and learn to live with it.
There are two levels of our reality.
Quantum physics says one level is level of possibility, where everything is possibility.
Nothing concrete, no thing, no thingness.
And then this level of reality where we, of course, live, where we find things manifest, where things look like they're particles, objects, concrete, solid, liquid, gases, all these are concrete objects.
We have become used to them as concrete objects.
But they begin As possibilities in a transcendent domain.
So, to break it down for the layperson, essentially the lowest form or the smallest form of the universe that we can measure when we get to subatomic particles, when we can look at subatomic particles, they defy the laws of physics, They exist in the same space at the same time in two different places.
They can be both moving and still, and they can teleport themselves.
The possibility of an electron being anywhere in the room.
Our knowledge is limited.
We only know that it's possible to find the electron here, there, at the ceiling, maybe at right here where I am, but we don't know where it actually will be if I try to see it, try to measure it, try to observe it.
And that's the second domain.
Second domain is domain of manifestation.
When an observer tries to measure where the electron is, The observer will find it at a definite place as a particle.
That's the manifest reality.
So something that is a wave of possibility, having the capacity of being everywhere, with our measurement, becomes a concrete object that we can say, well, it's a thing, there it is.
But if you're measuring it, and that's when it becomes a concrete object, Isn't it just assuming it wasn't a concrete object before you measured it and that it's always a concrete object?
The thing that people need to – I mean I've had a really hard time digesting any of this stuff.
But the thing that people need to look at first, I think, is the idea of superposition.
The idea that – what you were saying, the idea that they have measured things both moving and still at the same time and they have shown – That things can leap from one place to another.
So our real reality, as far as science, is accepted pretty much universally, right?
There's no debate in the scientific community about the movement of subatomic particles, right?
It's not only saying that the smaller you go, but the plot thickens when you realize that the reality at the macro scale is made of the small things.
So, of course, the effect is visible, much more easily measured for the small things.
But when the small things make big things, as you said, microphones and you and me, our body, that is, They're all quantum objects.
So we also, when nobody's observing us, including ourselves, like when we sleep, Deep sleep.
Nobody is observing me.
Where am I? I am only a possibility.
The only reason I can find myself in the same bed every night when I wake up, the only reason for that is that because I'm a macro object, my wave of possibility, although it expands a little, just as all waves must expand, you have seen water wave expanding, You know, if you throw a pebble in a pond of water, the water waves will expand, right?
Same thing happens with waves of possibility.
We do tend to expand as soon as you go to sleep as a wave of possibility, but the waves are so sluggish for macro objects.
For me, to move a substantial distance that somebody can discern it, it will take the edge of the universe.
So we don't discern it.
It moves like 10 to the minus 16 centimeter.
But today, with laser beams, we can actually measure such small distances that these macro objects, even macro objects, move While Newtonian physics would say, no, no, they're at rest.
Whereas our common sense would say, no, no, they're not moving.
But with a laser beam, we can actually measure that between your looking and my looking, just for a second, objects actually move, which appear to be stationary to the normal eye.
So we live in a very, very, very wonderfully creative world.
Why creative?
Because this movement also suggests something fantastic, that there are new possibilities.
And if we could capture those new possibilities and make them manifest, that's the explanation of creativity.
The center of mass of this table, for example, is pretty massive, probably moving about 10 to the minus 18 centimeters in a discernible time, like a minute or two.
Well, hologram is not always a good metaphor, but it is for this case because, you know, the objects can appear in more than one place in that sense.
Hologram, the information appears everywhere on the hologram.
So, these objects carry information which is in more than one place.
Potentially, it is more than one place.
This is why we say that we have discovered a new world of potentia from which our ordinary reality is created.
So ordinary reality is not as fixed as we thought it was.
If you allow the objects to go more and more in the quantum domain, in the realm of expansion into new possibility, where it has not expanded before, not so much with tables and chairs, mind you, but with our thoughts, with our feelings, then we can really get into creativity.
Well, that's when I have to talk to you about the creative process.
If you look at the creative process, creativity researchers have found that there are four stages.
The first stage everybody knows, preparation.
That just, I read up, I talk with you, I get some knowledge from picking your brain, I listen to a teacher, I listen to audios, videos, internet of course, and get some knowledge about the subject.
And then creativity researchers find a very strange thing happens.
The most creative people, they are not just doing preparation.
They also sit quietly and do nothing.
They really sit quietly and do nothing.
They call it the period of incubation, like a bird sits on an egg doing nothing.
See, imagine.
It was a tremendous surprise.
Nobody understood why do we need to sit down.
You know, creativity, after all, is action.
Why do we need to sit down quietly?
Why do we need to do nothing?
And then quantum physics came along, and we realized that in between our thinking, these objects' thoughts, they are possibilities of meaning.
They're waves.
So, like all waves, I was talking about the water wave before, if you throw a pebble in a pond, the water waves will expand as expanding crest lines.
So, same thing happens with the thoughts.
They expand in meaning, become waves of multiple meaning, possibilities of multiple meaning, multiple meaning, expanding, expanding, expanding.
The more they expand, the more meaning this packet of possibility will contain.
And so you have a better idea, better possibility, better probability of capturing a new meaning.
Because if you have a bigger possibility pool to choose from, obviously your chance of being creative is greater.
This is the idea that has explained how creativity comes to us.
Then when the actual When the answer appears, the new meaning that we are seeking, when it appears in the pool, and when I see the gestalt of all the new meanings that will give answer to my problem, then I pick it, then I choose it.
Still in the unconscious.
That's where my causal power of creativity lies, still in the unconscious.
But now it becomes conscious with the huomo.
This is the quantum leap, a discontinuous change from possibility into actuality.
So I actually captured the new thought, Joe.
I actually captured the new thought, and that's so surprising because it's new.
If we can do it from conscious into the unconscious, conscious imagination is still A stepping stone to the domain of possibility.
But if we imagine consciously, that is like stalking the unconscious, that eventually gets onto the unconscious.
And this is where things have this capacity of propagating, expanding, wave-like, becoming bigger and bigger pools of possibility for consciousness to choose from.
And when we choose, a new possibility might arise, or a whole combination of new possibilities might arise, which will contain the answer.
Yeah, the creation process has always been fascinating to me, and I've been saying this for a while, that I think we don't understand, we have the idea of the imagination of what's in the mind as being just, oh, pretend, make-believe, daydreaming, like those things come to mind when we think of imagination, but Everything physical that exists was created in the imagination.
The imagination is a machine for creating cities.
The imagination created nuclear power.
The imagination created satellites.
These are all because of the imagination.
Without the human imagination, there would be nothing.
But quantum physics is taking us a little bit further.
Imagination is a good starting point, as I said.
But imagination is still in our conscious thought.
So we have to understand that when we have conscious thoughts of imagination, Then we are proposing the unconscious to look at new stuff, process new stuff.
This is what we are doing.
What imagination takes us is from ordinary reality, mundane reality, that is familiar stuff.
Imagination is an in-between, half-step beyond that.
It's imagination.
It's not going to conform to the mundane stuff necessarily, right?
We can imagine very arbitrary stuff.
So what it does, it starts the beginning of a thought process.
Where thoughts can become more and more and more and more weird, and more and more and more new, but it's no longer possible to process them in the conscious.
Because in the conscious, we just cannot do it.
We don't have the capacity.
We are still limited by what we know.
The known Imposes too much constraint on what we can imagine in the domain of the unknown.
But as soon as it gets into the unconscious, unconscious stuff, more we imagine, the imaginary stuff will interact with other imaginary stuff, the thoughts will mix, and this mixing waves together will produce patterns of what you call patterns of interference of waves.
You were mentioning superposition, waves superpose, and creating many, many more new possibilities than before.
And one of these possibilities may very well be brand new.
That never has been manifested before.
So it's always a mystery.
How do we go from the known into the unknown?
The way we go is this taking advantage of what we call quantum thinking.
Thinking where we take advantage of the quantum domain, the domain of possibility, where possibility interacting with possibility creates up completely new stuff that has never manifested before.
He probably did experiments in his young days when he was a graduate student.
I did too.
But theorists don't do any experiments.
What they do is this creative exploration of the mind.
By that, they find new ideas.
New ideas, and then they predict stuff.
So Einstein's idea was, this is 1935, mind you.
The idea was that if two quantum objects interact, they become correlated.
And this is a new word that he used in that paper, he and his collaborators, Rosen and Podolsky.
These people really found, with their theory, with their mathematics, that if two objects once become correlated, then even when they are not interacting, even if they move away from each other, even then they can communicate.
Not in the usual way.
Not interacting with signals.
That's the usual.
You and I are interacting right now.
But we are interacting through a complexity of sound waves and electrical waves through these microphones.
So their communication uses a medium that can only be outside of space and time.
Because in space and time, Einstein himself gave us a theory of relativity which says that nothing can interact without exchanging signals going through space and time.
But these objects, quantum objects, once correlated, they have the capacity of signal-less communication.
So the key is in that they measure the communication and they show that there is no signal because the communication took place faster than the speed of light.
In all local signals going through space and time must travel either at the speed of light or less than the speed of light.
So if something can be shown to travel faster than the speed of light, it has to be non-local.
And this is what physicists now discovered in the laboratory.
Eleanor Spey in 1982 finally verified.
Einstein was dead a long time ago, 1955, so he never knew that his theory will one day not only prove to be right, but really revolutionize the whole world of physics by bringing in concepts of consciousness.
Well, the experiment is a little bit complex probably for a show like this, but I can give you the gister.
Too late for that.
No, it's intriguing.
It's also easy to understand because there is no signal, it's easy to understand.
How to detect it is a little more difficult because you have to talk about photons and photons come with a characteristic called polarization and you get more and more technical and I'm sure your listeners will run away, but we don't have to go that far.
Let's put it this way.
If we irradiate an atom, certain atoms with a laser beam, then they emit sometimes a pair of photons, one going this way, one going that way.
So what these experimenters did, one experimenter was measuring this photon over here, The other one was measuring the photon over there in the laboratory, still separated by laboratory distance, let's say several meters.
The way the communication went, they could flip.
This is why things get a little complicated.
They could flip the polarization axis of one of the photons, and the other photon's polarization axis seemed to have flipped instantly.
They could show this by the technology that we have now.
Well, that means that consciousness, they're within consciousness, they must be, otherwise there will be duality.
So, we don't say that molecules are conscious, but we say molecules have to be within consciousness.
Because if consciousness is the ground of being, And molecules, atoms, solid objects, macro objects, everything is within consciousness as waves of possibility, then we can think of this force that changes possibility into actuality as a conscious choice.
Because what is a possibility wave but a packet of multi-faceted potentia?
Lots of stuff can happen, right?
Multi-facets.
And consciousness uses the particular facet that becomes concretized, that becomes actualized.
So in this way, we have found not only the force that consciousness implies that changes possibility into actuality, but we know the nature of that force.
It consists of choice.
Consciousness chooses.
And so why is non-locality coming in?
So how does consciousness choose in an experiment like a space?
Here is a possibility of a photon, here is another possibility of a photon.
Consciousness must be choosing them simultaneously because otherwise there would be No non-local communication.
Non-local communication proves that there is some form of matrix that is involved with the communication that permits faster than the speed of light communication and therefore must be outside of space and time.
Do we think of consciousness the same way universally?
Because what you're saying is an instantaneous distribution of information, whereas I think what a lot of people think of as consciousness is being sentient.
We're saying that the medium that chooses is the medium called consciousness.
That was in the unconscious state at that time.
But now, when the measurement actually has taken place, there has to be two observers with brains in those locations, because consciousness just does not measure arbitrarily.
There is consciousness and there is these observers.
What I'm saying is not only we need the concept of non-local consciousness connecting the objects, connecting the observers, but we also need to get the concept that at the same time there is non-local consciousness, non-material consciousness choosing.
At the same time, there must also be the observer.
Because without the observer we never see anything.
Can you ever imagine finding something without an observer, without a sentient being?
You have to factor that in when considering the possibility of actualizing the possibility.
Without individual consciousness looking, no actualization ever takes place.
So non-local consciousness is a quescent, it's sort of, it's an unconscious existence.
Things are processed, but nothing concrete happens in non-local consciousness.
Only when the observer is there, Then, this concretization that we are calling, physicists use the word collapse, the waves collapse into the particle.
So with the looking, the process of looking, the process of changing possibility into actuality not only creates the object, it creates the very subject that you experience.
But that does not change possibility into actuality.
Only in the presence of a concrete observer, possibility changes to actuality.
Put two and two together.
So what happens?
In the presence of an observer, Non-local consciousness collapses.
It gives a circularity.
Without observer, there is no collapse of the possibility into actuality.
But then look at it from the other angle.
Without collapse, where is the observer?
There is no concrete brain.
Brain is just a possibility.
This circularity is the key to understanding why quantum measurement can take place in the brain.
This circular kind of logic, this circular logic is what manifests reality from possibility.
All these devices, like the human brain or a human living cell, living cell of an amoeba even, simplest of creatures, All these very mysterious entities that we have theorized about but could not explain their basic characteristics, like life, sentience, now we can understand how they occur.
They occur through quantum measurement involving the circular logic.
Doug Hofstadter, who is an artificial intelligence researcher, wrote a marvelous book in 1980 called Goral Escher-Bach.
In this book, he talked about these circular logical systems as tangled hierarchies.
So, as surprising as it sounds to you, Joe, and I'll just throw at you, brain has a tangled hierarchy within it.
This is its specialty.
And because it has that, it is capable of experiencing consciousness as being the subject.
It captures the subject of consciousness.
Consciousness identifies with the brain, and when brain is involved in a measurement process, we who are carrying that brain will say, I am looking at the electron.
Just as you with your brain looking at me say, I am looking at Amit.
I say, I am looking at Joe.
Where does that I-ness come from?
Before the measurement, we are just consciousness, non-local consciousness and possibilities within it.
I still am not understanding how the human consciousness could be measured or proven to be non-local when the brain, what we believe is the center of all this activity that we equate to consciousness, This is a very perceptive question.
If it's affected, if it's shut off, if it's damaged, we know that it affects consciousness profoundly.
So what is the basis for believing that this consciousness is non-local?
But we are still meditating with the idea that somehow we'll communicate directly without signals.
And now, both of our brains are connected to individual EEG machines, electroencephalogram.
Measure brain waves.
And one of the subjects is shown a series of light flashes.
That, of course, will produce electrical activity in the occipital area of the brain, and the brain wave apparatus, the EEG, will pick it up, measure it.
It appears in a graph which is called evoke potential.
When you extract the signal out of all the brainwaves, eliminating the noise.
So far, no surprise.
The other subject is not shown.
This is what the surprise is.
So please listen carefully.
The other subject is not shown a series of light flashes.
No light flashes at all.
The other subject is connected to the first subject only via this intention, meditation.
We will have direct communication.
So how do we know direct communication has occurred?
The brain waves from this subject Not exposed to light waves, just brain waves of this subject, who is vegetating basically, are picked up from the electroencephalogram machine connected to that brain and then analyzed in exactly the same way, eliminate the noise, extract the signal.
The two Signals extracted, one from a subject who has seen light flashes, one from a subject which has not seen light flashes.
The two extracted potentials, one is the evoked potential, the other one is called transferred potential.
They overlap almost exactly, like 70% overlap is often seen, 80% overlap is often seen.
It's amazing.
They not only have the same strength, But also the same phase.
Reaction in his brain anyway, which shows that the effect of the light flashes, electrical activity, somehow, without signals, has been transferred from one brain to the other.
Isn't it possible, though, that the mind is where consciousness is stored, but yet it communicates non-locally with other minds and other consciousness that are also stored in people's brains?
And that the consciousness is in the brain, and that the non-locality is just the connection?
Physical transfer of information, let's put that, not energy.
No energy actually goes from one way to the other.
But the brains change in such a way, there is obviously a synchrony in the way this brain changed, but this brain changed because light flashes fall on that brain.
This brain changing not because of light flashes, but because this brain is associated with this meditative awareness.
Quantum physics even gives it more exactly, it uses the word correlation.
We need to be correlated, like that in the experiment that I just described, which by the way was performed first by a neurophysiologist named Jacobo Greenberg at the University of Mexico.
But that kind of thing, you know, his experiment depended crucially on this conscious meditative intention.
But people can get correlated simpler than that.
Like in a football stadium, people are getting correlated just by the simply identification with the team.
That can correlate people.
On the internet, we never see people, but we are correlated because we are some cause that brings us together.
So there are many ways to get correlated.
And then if people, once they become correlated, certain things, I believe that it's easier to transfer emotions than actual thoughts.
In the thought realm, we don't correlate very well because thoughts are rational and rationality takes us away from this non-local consciousness.
But when we are emotional, Then this non-local consciousness can correlate us and the effects can travel much better.
This is why one person's bad mood can get another person into bad mood.
Or one person's happiness can be communicated to another person's happiness.
I went to India recently, Bangalore, and they have parks, you know, where people gather together every morning like at 6, 6.30, and they will have this laughing meditation.
It's a wonderful thing to watch, and you watch for a while, you yourself will start laughing.
And you're supposed to laugh, so everybody just...
But you know, you could not maintain that kind of saying for very long.
If anything, the mouth muscles will get tired and so forth.
But here, because of that non-local correlation which comes into play after a while, you can see more than what you'd expect just imitating other people to laugh.
I understand that there's some sort of a shared… Well, laughing meditation, this kind of thing… But even the experiments you were talking about… This kind of thing, something unusual happens, is not very difficult to show.
Dean Radhan, Who is a parapsychologist working at the Institute of Noetic Sciences.
Dean Radden does the following experiment.
He takes what is called random number generators.
These things are devices in which radioactive decays are taking place.
Decays are completely random.
As you know, radioactivity is a quantum process, completely random.
So why is it that with these people meditating in the room with all this jazz that it affects it, whereas I would assume anytime you run a random number generator, there's someone meditating somewhere in the world, probably massive groups of them.
How could the effect of just a couple individuals vary that much from the great hive?
Now, if you correlate and then look for these effects, send people away and they still remain correlated because they are meditating, then that should work.
If you set up a group of meditators, but not in Los Angeles, but in Los Angeles and San Francisco and New York, but they all were correlated, In some ways, by telephone or by internet or some intention given by a common source, once they're correlated and they start meditating, distance should not matter.
Okay, so essentially what you're saying is their energy focused on this one thing can now be measured, whereas if their energy is not focused on it, it doesn't have an effect on it, and the focusing on the thing The focusing is the intention.
Electrical activity was transferred from my brain to your brain without any electrical connection.
The connection is non-local, no question, right?
You're not having any difficulty with that.
That's just fact.
How do we interpret it?
To interpret it, how could this happen?
How could this happen is because you, although you have not been exposed to these light flashes now, but you have in your brain memory of seeing light flashes.
You have seen light flashes many times in your life.
So, out of these memories, which are all unconscious processes, by the way, whenever you are vegetating, your unconscious brain, unconscious, unconscious, picks up this brain stuff and they become the subjects of the unconscious for processing.
So unconscious always has these memories to That's an interesting point.
Then what happens if you do an experiment where one person experiences something that they have no background in, have never seen before, most people don't know, nor does the other person in the other room who's going to receive the signal, how does he process something that he's never experienced before?
So this unconscious is just giving you possibility.
So unless this entity called consciousness is choosing possibility, you would not have the actual transfer potential.
So how can you have a transfer potential from evoke potential being transferred by a non-local matrix that we are calling consciousness?
Because it has to be consciousness which chooses out of the possibilities of your brain generated by previous memory because you are meditating with your partner.
And the partner has seen these light flashes.
Consciousness, by virtue of that correlation, is choosing from your unconscious, which has the memory, but nothing more than that, has the possibility, but nothing more than that, no actuality.
But consciousness is choosing the actuality because you are meditating to receive that.
You already agreed many times actually during this broadcast that there is without signals a transfer of information or transfer of electric potential.
And in fact, the person who's receiving it on the other end, even though consciousness is non-local, the other person isn't even conscious, they're receiving it, if you want to look at it that way, or cognizant.
It's now done so accurately, analyzed by computers.
You are looking at a town square, at a statue.
Your correlated person, correlated by the intention of the experimenter, is sitting in a closet in the laboratory.
He's just drawing a picture of the statue that you're looking at.
Nobody knows what you're looking at.
A computer has chosen where you will go to look at the statue.
A computer, unbeknownst to everyone connected with the experiment, is analyzing the picture that your correlated friend, psychic, is drawing of what you're looking at.
And then the computer is bringing the two together, the picture of the statue that you're actually looking at and the picture that the person has drawn.
The computer does the matching, and the computer says, hey, there is 90% match between these two.
This could not be just a happenstance.
This got to be a transfer of information, got to be an example of telepathic communication.
So that means that there's a connection that we don't know about that has always existed between human beings constantly and the only thing that's missing is the intention and the focus on the two together.
I'm sorry, is this something that you think as we have evolved from lower primates to human beings, is this something that is beginning to show its potential in the human species?
Yeah, I heard about this, and I've also heard some other things that Rupert Sheldrake has said recently, something about the speed of light varying, which a lot of people are coming down on him for, that it's bad science, and that it's pseudoscience at best.
Yeah, I haven't seen that either, but the people in my message board were going bananas about him.
Because he's a very controversial character in the first place because if what he says is true, like as the amazing Randy is always offered, I think it's a million dollars for anybody can prove any sort of psychic connection.
Somehow, this was the data, anthropological data, I've looked at the paper in the original journal, it's fine.
But when somehow somebody reported on this data in a book, that somebody invented an extension which never happened, which is that monkeys in a nearby island without any connection, Picked up the same learning.
I would assume that something like animals washing their food, if human beings, I mean the word evolution is a very touchy subject amongst people when it comes to natural selection and the advancement of the species, but It's commonly acknowledged scientifically that we were once primitive organisms.
That's all that was on the planet.
If that is the case, the intelligent animals like chimpanzees or monkeys or whatever, I would assume that much like people slowly all over the world figured out how to make tools with rocks, that monkeys would slowly figure out new things as well.
Belief was, ever since Darwin, and after some verifications of Darwin that came about, the belief has been that genes are the only way that any hereditary characteristics learning can be transferred to subsequent generations.
That has been the belief.
Now though, there are phenomena Which show that no something else may very well be involved.
One of the striking phenomenon is this phenomenon of morphogenesis, or cell differentiation.
We all begin as, you and I both began, as single-celled embryos, right?
And then that single cell divides itself, divides itself, making a replica of itself.
But it is still true that our toe cells and our brain cells behave very differently.
Why?
Because the proteins are very different, proteins that are made in those cells.
How are proteins made?
Proteins are made because of instructions written in the gene, called the genetic code.
But the genes of all of our cells are the same.
So the explanation is that some genes are activated in the toe, To toe proteins, and other genes are activated in the brain, making the brain proteins.
This is why brain cells differ very much in their activity than the toe cells.
So initially the belief was the program must also be in the genes.
Now people are seeing that no, the programs for cell differentiation are not in the genes.
They are in the epigenetics, outside of the genes.
So Schellbrecht originally was suggesting something very similar with his idea of morphogenetic field.
And so if you assume that morphogenetic fields are the blueprints of biological form and they are non-local, then there is no difficulty in explaining why the toe cells behave very differently in brain cells.
How does the cell know what to do when it is in a different part of the body, if it's in the Toe, then those genes have to be activated which can make protein which can perform in the toe way.
If it's in the brain, similarly, those genes will be activated which can make protein which makes it behave the brain way.
But how are they doing it all in synchrony?
Because of this non-local morphogenetic field that is involved.
So, in a way, epigenetics is the first step of verification of Sheldrake's idea.
The next step is taken by biologists like Bruce Lipton, who are saying that, well, quantum processes are involved in biology.
And so if quantum processes are involved, then our consciousness-based quantum measurement theory is telling us that consciousness must be involved.
So in this way, we now can understand the whole gamut of ideas that leads to these things.
And finally, to connect up what you were just saying, these instincts, certain learning from the past do get passed on.
So the belief is some specific type of learning which involves emotions.
My guess is that if the learnings involve emotional, has an emotional aspect, then probably the morphogenetic fields are easier to transfer.
But if it is purely cerebral, mental, then it is probably harder to transfer through morphogenetic field.
But morphogenetic field transfer is a very, very good idea, and you have to find some explanation of the instincts.
It did get transferred, and instincts are universal.
So we have a very peculiar situation.
Instincts could not possibly be explained by genetics.
Many people have written about this.
It's very difficult to understand on the basis of genes.
So if you bring morphogenetic field to understand the instinct, then you get the idea that, yes, we can today become a nice person, have brain circuits of love, and then a few generations later, via the transference by this morphogenetic field, everybody will begin to have circuits of love in their brain.
Well, you bring up a really interesting point because the chemical composition of the mind, all the different serotonin and dopamine and the neurotransmitters and all the different things that are going on inside the mind, alter those in one way or another, positive or negative, and you get profound effects on how the person behaves and thinks and interfaces with their reality.
How do you feel personally about all the different pills that people are on and all the different pills that alter consciousness?
It seems a very strange time when we are doing so much experimentation on a daily basis, altering The way a person's mind is interfacing with its reality and we see profound effects.
A lot of people don't know 90% of school shooters either were on antidepressants, had been on them and were on withdrawal.
90% is a big number.
It doesn't prove that that's what caused it because a lot of times these people are depressed and guess what?
People who are depressed get on antidepressants.
It doesn't mean that it caused them to be psychotic or to have Psychotic breaks, but there's something to be studied, for sure.
Well, it's very dangerous to put the natural brain under drugs of any kind, especially those drugs which are psychoactive, because you don't even know.
The studies are so scanty, you don't even know what the effects are.
And how the effects will be, especially the long-term effects.
And what we do know is that depression is now the third biggest epidemic disease.
Well, it's almost epidemic.
But besides heart disease and cancer, depression is the third most common chronic disease, seems like.
Why is it?
Because depression depends so much on these brain chemicals.
And, of course, so much also on how we process our stuff, emotions, thinking.
So something is basically going wrong in the new theory, where we talk in terms of chakras, because those are the places where they are very much involved with our emotions.
The emotion that is involved in the highest place in our body, the neocortex, emotions that are involved with specifically are what we call satisfaction.
So, if the neocortex is played with, certainly it will affect our level of satisfaction.
By the same token, people might be using antidepressant to get a pseudo level of satisfaction.
You know what happens when you take Prozac.
You get sort of, you get temporarily, you get to look at the world as okay.
You get that feeling of okay.
You're satisfied.
So people are using things like that to give them a feeling of satisfaction because it's not there in the absence of taking this drug.
So, in this way, but we don't know the consequence of taking Prozac in a good brain, long-term consequences of it.
I am terribly, terribly upset about the drug culture because we are getting into stuff The very device that we need that is intimately connected with our consciousness.
With our brain, there is no manifest consciousness.
We have to recognize that.
To play with that vehicle, which gives us the basic way of cognition, basic way of experiencing everything that we know.
Conversely though, I have met people that have some sort of an imbalance.
They have some sort of a chemical balance in the mind, and I've personally seen people take medication, and it's benefited them greatly.
It's improved their...
But there's that, but then there's also people that just...
They're not living a fulfilling life.
They don't have good friendships, relationships, job opportunities.
They're not pursuing the career they really wanted to.
They have good reason to be depressed.
And a lot of times what that depression is, is in fact...
The world around you and how your body is perceiving it and the negative energy that you're getting and feeling about it is supposed to motivate you to change.
It's supposed to motivate you to move away from it.
The negative feelings that you have after any personal altercation with someone.
Those are supposed to be like...
That's to let you know, hey, whatever you just did, don't fucking do that anymore.
Okay?
However you interacted with a person that created this terrible wave of bad feelings...
The brain, the device itself may have wrong neurochemicals and therefore we get dissatisfaction, we get depression, or it can be the psychological effect of stuff that's producing the depression.
If it is the latter psychological stuff that's producing dissatisfaction, then actually, in a way, it's easier because we can use psychological methods.
In fact, we should.
I am not in favor of using brain chemicals like Prozac To re-establish the balance if the cause is psychological.
If the cause is coming from genetics or family history or clear brain dysfunction, brain imbalance, then it should be treated with With brain chemicals, with medicine.
But if it is psychologically caused, it's better to try to improve the satisfaction level of the person.
And we can.
We can.
By bringing emotions in the higher chakra, starting with the heart chakra, where love resides, then expression, which resides in the throat chakra, and then focusing, which resides in the Third eye or in between the two brows, brow chakra, and then of course the crown chakra, the neocortex, which is the seat of satisfaction.
So we can improve satisfaction by concentrating, not so much on the lower emotions, which is the lower chakras.
There, the emotions that you get are all those fear and sexuality and pride.
You have to differentiate between people who are depressed because they're in a bad state in life and people who are depressed because the mind's not working correctly.
And there are two.
The real issue is the over-diagnosis then, or at least the over-prescription, over-prescribing.
What psychiatrists tend to do, because it's easy to treat the brain chemical with a chemical, Psychologists try to get away with just using drugs because the effect will be quicker.
So the best strategy probably is to use antidepressants immediately, because that will give a temporary healing.
But of course the psychological reasons will be present, so it will come back, it will continue.
And then you start the psychological treatment that I'm suggesting, which already people are suggesting I shouldn't take the original credit for it, nothing like that.
But dealing with noble emotions, higher emotions, positive emotions, that healing will take time.
Prozac can give us time.
Prozac can buy us time.
So we can use a combination of both conventional and the new medicine, mind-body medicine suggestion.
What I suggested is called mind-body medicine because you are trying to heal the brain in balance with the effect of the mind, with the help of the mind.
This seems to be a real issue with modern humans, too, in that the life that we live does not really satisfy all of our natural reward systems that we have in place.
The hunter-gatherer systems and sitting in a cubicle and all of it.
Even monogamy is a struggle for a lot of people for that very reason, is that we have a lot of genetics that are set up from A different time, and they're still in our system.
So we live in a world where we really need A new educational system which will bring these aspects up and use creativity quite extensively, because these things require creative learning.
What has to happen is that the context of our thinking, which is thinking without the emotions, this has evolved so much, you know, it becomes very cerebral thinkers, only involving the neocortex.
Instead, we can start involving some of what we left behind, some of the emotions that are into it, some of the emotions that we have not dealt with.
And we have to reunite, reintegrate how we think about emotions, reintegrate that into our present life system, which is more thinking rationally, which is thinking about thinking itself, not so much thinking emotionally.
What happens is that especially with pranayama, breathing exercises, the energy gets into the crown chakra, satisfaction, right?
Or in the higher chakras, very definitely.
So crown chakra is connected with, you know, if crown chakra is satisfied, you get these endorphin molecules.
That's the byproduct of yoga, of the crown chakra.
So endorphin molecules are wonderful.
That's the high, actually.
So it's a very simple explanation why we get this high and why it should not be trivialized.
There are many other ways to get high, but this is one of the best ways because at the same time, you're getting an exercise of the muscles and the joints.
In reality, it's a small percentage of the yoga people that are fake.
It's a tiny percentage.
And if you think about the general scammers in the population, there's always going to be issues with men and male ego and posturing and there's always going to be similar issues with women and women dealing with other women.
I've seen the fake yoga man and I've seen the fake yoga woman.
I'll take the fake yoga woman every day.
The fake yoga man is trying to get laid.
The fake yoga woman is just trying to pretend to be a little more spiritual and non-materialistic than she truly is.
Well, you know, these things, however, I think that some people will get into the New Age movement with the idea of, you know, finding relationship, which in a way, of course, is finding...
And I'm not trying to focus entirely on the negative, but I'm trying to address what I know people in the general public, the issues that they have with folks that claim to be spiritual.
It's like you run into a fake yoga person.
You're like, oh my god.
You know, the typically unique guy with his beads and his hemp sandals.
At the end of the night, John Master, of course, says, yeah, stay with me, no problem.
So the thief is stealing this stuff of the whole thing.
So the Master opens the eyes and says, do you remember, did you remember to take everything?
Because, you know, I really don't need that stuff over there either, so you can take that too.
So the thief is caught, but he's very surprised.
The master is not throwing him in jail or calling the police or anything like that.
So he's become a little curious.
So he lays things down.
Why aren't you not angry?
Because I'm telling your stuff.
The master says, oh, well, most of this stuff, look, I don't really need it.
I still have attachments, so I keep them.
So if you are taking them, it's okay.
So the thief becomes a little more curious.
He says, well, since you don't mind me stealing it any time, why should I have to steal it at the end of the night?
Let me stay with you for a few days, just watching your methods and what you do.
Then I'll take them away at the end of the week.
Master says, yeah, fine, just stay with me.
So the thief stays for a few days.
When he looks at the Master and tries to do some of the stuff, he starts changing.
By faking, initially he thought he'll just fake the Master because then he'll pick up the faking and then his stealing capacity will increase many-fold because he will impress people by being a spiritual man.
People will have, he will have more access to more houses and he will be able to steal more.
That was the original idea.
This is why he wanted to watch the Master.
But then as he did things, meditate and sit and talk to people, after even a few days, he started changing.
So he can begin with a fake and end up with something else.
And of course, Master knew it all the time.
So at the end of the seven days, Master says, okay, now you take this stuff and leave.
Why are you prolonging your stay?
And the fellow falls on the feet.
That's an Indian idiom of saying surrender, says that.
No, I want to learn what makes a you.
I'm not interested in stealing the small stuff anymore.
I want to steal the stuff that you are made of.
So, you see, the way we can make even use of this fake is amazing, by being patient with the people who are faking and just allowing them in the process.
Because although the initial intention is superficial, but as you do them, Consumption itself, consuming this very wonderful stuff, very wonderful behavior, will begin to give the idea, oh, maybe I can become a producer.
These energies that I fake by imitating, if I actualize them, then they will actually produce changes in me that are profound.
We should open the gate for that, other than closing it by saying, oh, you are just a fake.
You know, be a little more tolerant about them.
So I encourage people using the quantum language, although they have no idea what they are talking about.
But then, you know, you explain it one time and they will become a little curious and initially their curiosity will be, oh, I can pick up a little more and impress people a little more.
But they become a little more curious, a little more curious.
One day they will ask, well, can I actually start doing this stuff and really be creative?
Well, the original, if you read Patanjali's Yoga Sutra, he just introduces Sato Yoga as a way of finding a comfortable place to meditate.
Originally, the idea was just to sit comfortably, and in order to sit comfortably in meditation for a long period of time, stretching helps.
And then they discovered one very wonderful thing as people meditated.
The main job of meditation, they found, is to create gap between thoughts.
You slow down your mental process.
So once they discovered that the idea of slowing down the mental process helps enormously our creativity, our spirituality, Once they found that out, then they realized the next wonderful thing is that isn't yoga also a way of slowing down the body?
Isn't pranayama a way of slowing down the breaths and therefore all the organs?
So the interest grew that yoga itself, photoyoga itself, It's not just stretching or just working on the joints.
It's also a way to slow down the body and therefore the mind.
It's indirectly slowing down the mind because if the body is slow, mind will also be slow.
In the future, and for folks who have never heard me say this before, even though I've said it a million times, when you eat cannabis, it has a completely different psychoactive effect when you eat it.
When cannabis is processed by the liver, it produces something called 11-hydroxy metabolite, which is approximately four to five times more psychoactive than THC. So that's why it has that insane effect.
It's not just insane, it's an alien effect that you don't get when you smoke pot.
Eating it is a very, very different experience, and you could easily overdo it.
Maybe your wife just got so hot, she's like, I'm just going to pretend to be blacked out, and it's way less stressful than walking around.
And then driving under it, you know, this is why I don't really like the idea of legalizing marijuana in a sand, because driving with marijuana, not marijuana, at least the oral kind, It's very, very difficult.
That driving experience was the most difficult half hour in my entire life.
In fact, you know, my change came only after I realized it.
One day I was at a conference on nuclear physics, giving a paper, erudite paper, of course, nothing to do with everyday life, and I give this paper with gusto.
Nobody appreciates it, at least so I thought.
And I think that the other guys, although they are talking about equally esoteric nonsense, but they are much more appreciated by the audience and at the party especially, by the women, the fair sex.
I do in the sense that, yes, creativity has a component of free will.
It starts with the free will of the ego.
Ego has one free will, which is a very crucial element of creativity, which is that at some point the ego realizes that it really does not know.
And therefore, start saying no to all conditioning.
No to condition meanings, no to condition habits, no to condition patterns, no to condition behavior.
And that's when we make room.
That's when we have an open mind.
We make room for learning new stuff.
And that's when creativity can come to us.
Before then, we start really thinking that we know it all with our reservoir of knowledge.
Because I have a lot of expertise, therefore I know.
But expertise don't bring us knowledge.
Expertise just bring us a very special fraction of knowledge that is useful To solve certain problems with given context.
Because the context is known, therefore the expertise always says, well, somewhere in my expertise there is an answer.
And you develop a knack, a habit of finding that answer fairly quickly.
And people admire that, of course.
You go ahead in your society because you are a very efficient problem solver.
But the thing that happens with open mind is that you realize that real-life problems are not given within contexts.
The contexts are not given to you.
You have to discover not only the new meaning, but also the new context of it.
And this is what makes real-life problems very difficult.
We were touching about this earlier.
We don't learn that stuff.
You know, this hunter-gatherer sitting in me, how to integrate that with the abstract thinker of today, this is not given in any book.
This is not given within given context.
So, how do you get into this kind of thing?
You have to use creativity.
You have to become open first, that, okay, with this rational mind, which has only learned about abstract thinking, you are not going to Integrate my emotions of the hunter-gatherer days with the one that is today who is all the suppressed emotions.
We're not going to integrate.
We have to open up.
We have to recognize our ignorance completely and invite creativity in our life.
So that idea, that idea was the most important idea probably that eventually, you know, changed me as a person.
So the idea that So in saying, I'm sorry, this is a hard way to wrap your head around it, but in saying that you have free will and you don't have free will at the same time.
But this kind of rationality precludes emotions, precludes intuition, There's a problem with the definition, the word rational, like you're being irrational, you're not being, have some rational thinking, and then rationalizing, which is a negative, you know, rationalizing, it's a very strange.
When you say rationalize, what we are really saying is that you are using rational thinking to where it does not belong.
That's rationalizing.
We rationalize a way where intuition belongs.
We rationalize a way where emotions belong.
So instead, the new science, what the new science does, it admits it's a science of experience, not just sensory experience that materialists agree with.
The new science says that our emotions, our thinking, and our intuition, all three are valid ways of knowing, in addition to sensing.
So we have four valid ways of knowing, physical, vital, mental, and supramental, the intuition.
And when we employ all four ways of knowing, we go beyond the rational being.
In the rational being, we go only the physical way of knowing and the mental, rational, logical way of knowing.
A great quote, rather, that the only thing smart people are better at is rationalizing their dumb ideas.
That's a very funny thing when it comes to certain focuses, certain things that people do rationalize, whether it's environmental disasters or doing things in other countries that are unethical or immoral.
The ability to rationalize, and especially the ability to rationalize on a large scale, like as a corporation, It's a key problem with the civilization, isn't it?
We know about creativity so much today that if people are investing, I think we really can inspire Lot of very capable people in a lifestyle which will generate happy people.
Well, let me tell you something what we're doing because this is not something we ever set out to do.
When Brian and I started this podcast three years ago, it was just on a laptop in my office and we were just trying to have some fun.
We were just doing it just to be silly.
We had done previous things like that, webcasts where we had done them in hotel rooms and when we were on the road doing stand-up.
Over the course of three years, one of the things that's happened is people have told us that what they've gotten in this podcast, in this communication, is they've gotten an ability to interact or at least hear people interact that are like no one they know.
So they're changing the way they think about life.
They're seeing that there's other ways to look at things.
And in fact, a lot of your reality is shaped by the way you choose to view the world and that you can morph that and change that.
And this podcast, and again, we're not taking credit for it because I didn't know it was going to happen, has had an amazingly profound effect on people.
Whereas I've talked to Literally hundreds of people that say the podcast changed their life, and that once they started listening, they started eating healthy, they started exercising, they feel better, they think about things better, they try not to be a shitty person, they try to be positive, and they understand and feel the effect of this positive thinking.
I agree with you, and again, we're not taking credit for this.
This is something that just happened on its own.
Is it a side effect of allowing people into your life and into your way of thinking?
Because how these things are actually depends a lot on the language you use.
And it is a fact that we have a habit of using languages like mind and consciousness in a synonymous way.
Yes.
Be done that way.
What happens then is we don't understand each other anymore.
So here you are, not so much conversant with the new science vocabulary, and here I am, without teaching you any vocabulary, just get right into the discussion, and we had a dissonance of words for a while.
I don't even think it was a dissonance, quite honestly.
I think I was just trying to really...
I was trying to play the part of the person that is listening to this, For the first time, I'm aware of these concepts, I'm aware of your work, and I really do appreciate you coming on the podcast to talk about it.
But even for someone like me, who's read at least a half a dozen books on this stuff, it's hard to wrap your head around.
I often say that quantum physics is simpler than Newtonian physics.
Because Newtonian physics, you get very quickly the idea that, you know, science can solve everything.
And in quantum physics, because the choice is brought into four from the beginning, immediately start relating that, hey, I know about choice, I know about, you know, this stuff is, science is giving us this stuff.
Immediately, mind mellows a little, and the science becomes more humanistic.
He's a theoretical physicist and professor of physics at the University of Maryland with another guy named John.
He's the John S. Toll professor of physics at the University of Maryland.
He found self-correcting computer code in the equations of string theory.
I don't know if you've heard about this.
It was a really interesting Again, really hard to follow conversation that he had with Neil deGrasse Tyson, who we've had on the show, and I talked to Neil about it, and even he was trying to wrap his head around what this meant.
But they found double and even self-dual linear binary code error correcting block code, which was first invented by Claude Shannon in the 1940s, has been discovered embedded within the equations of superstring theory.
I'm laughing because here we are talking mainly about quantum physics and consciousness, and here you go into such a sophisticated discussion of something that is remotely connected with quantum physics, of course, you know, string theory.
But, you know, yeah, it could very well be, but I'll tell you something.
The reason I lost interest in such details is very simple.
String theory is a good example of what The idea that people propose when they say the word pseudoscience.
Pseudoscience is that where theory and experiment are both not visible aspects.
It's just theory.
This is a good example of just theory because string theory can never be verified in our experience.
We just cannot do it.
It's talking about too high an energy that we cannot simulate in the laboratory nor in the High-energy cosmology.
So in other words, it's really very, very, very, very, very, very far out.
So, you know, here we are at once, this rational culture that we call scientific materialism doesn't hesitate to talk about string theory, which is highly abstract mathematical theory.
Not that it's not interesting.
As a mind game, certainly it's interesting.
And then they object Things like telepathy, which is very much human, where the objection, of course, is that it may not be quite apropos science because there may not be any good theory, there may not be any good data.
So it's a very strange thing.
We do, because it has mathematics in it, We call science which cannot ever be verified quite doable science.
But see, this is what puzzles me, that the culture is so obtuse that they will never call...
There are many concepts like that, you know, which, because of their mathematical nature, they're accepted part of science, because they're mathematical, because mathematics is so vital it is felt.
It's just too abstract taking place in places that are so remote from the human experience that technological breakthroughs on the face of it is, you know, at least for high energy physics you could always give a technological justification for in the form of weapons technology.
Not particularly good, but weapons technology at least is a feasible offshoot of energy physics.
But these kind of stuff, you know, it's just a bit too far for my taste.
We should concentrate instead of problems which can immediately be addressed, problems that has impact on who we are, what we are, what we are doing here, give us answers to real-life questions like how to run our life, how to run our society, how to run our economy.
And we have the science at hand.
That's what the new science is trying to do.
Instead, we have too much emphasis on things that have Not much to do with us, the human condition.
Yeah, I've never been able to understand that and I'm glad that you couldn't understand it either or that it can't be understood or that at least it can't be verified.
It doesn't need to be understood because it can't be verified.
That's my simple proposition.
Who needs to understand things, clutter up your brain for things which has no consequence in my life and cannot even be verified and can never be built, never give rise to any technology that I can relate to.
You said earlier in the podcast that now, because of lasers and stuff like that, you can measure particles a lot more accurately, and that's how you found that particles actually are moving.
Do you, is the laser itself, is that an accurate tool?
Has that been proven to be 100%?
Because what if it was just, you know, the laser saying that, but then down, you know, 20 years from now, you find out, oh, it's just a laser.
So, for a macro object, like we were talking about tables and chairs at that time, in between your looking and my looking, they move so very little, It's very hard to observe with just ordinary way that we measure, like triangulating and all that.
But with the laser beam, because lasers travel in very, very close to straight lines, the diffraction effect is virtually gone.
Very good straight lines.
So triangulation becomes very accurate, because you really can go a long distance and Even that small measurement, you can triangulate and therefore measure it.
If you go to audible.com forward slash Joe, you will get one free audiobook and 30 days off of Audible, the premier audio resource as far as audiobooks and podcasts and comedy albums.
It's a beautiful company and they have been supporting this podcast for a while so we appreciate them very much.