STUDY - Technical - New Dacian's Medicine
How
it Works... Our "Body" (10).
Translation Draft
In summarizing some of the ones presented in previous posts, we note a series of observations that appear to demonstrate the existence of a possibility of communication throughout the living world through an energy field emitted by the body: communication between cells of a tissue, between human organisms (two or more - including of all individuals of a species), between man and plants and between man and microorganisms.
Everything that is alive emits and receives information on a specific code, probably to each species or to the living world itself in its entirety. If we found the key to this code, this universal language that expresses life, we would get the opportunity to "communicate" with any living person (especially ourselves or our fellows) with unsuspected "useful" possibilities even under the conditions of an intuitive language. What seems to us to be new, unknown until now, is the existence of the possibility to communicate, i.e. to emit, receive and process information throughout the living world, regardless of the philogenic step in which it is located, therefore, regardless of the level of development of the nervous system.
This property seems to us so specific to the living world that we believe that it can be added to the common laws of organization of living matter. The very essence of the living we believe that we could express it through the possibility of communicating, of achieving unity with the environment and, through successive levels of integration, with the whole living world.
The energetic mediation of human relations requires, in theory, another basis in understanding psychic phenomena. Some psychic experiences outside of open states (in the considerations so far of classical psychology - and, which we will talk about later) can find scientific explanation viewed from this prism. We believe that this possibility of communication, of information transfer between individuals, is much more pronounced in the world without articulated language.
We could not thus explain a lot of appropriate acts of conduct bearing the seal of a "rational understanding" present in the world of animals inferior to man. Beyond a series of gestures, sounds, smells, which have a certain meaning for animals, complex actions of group leadership, distribution of group role, undertaking of joint actions, it would be possible to carry out on this path (implicitly, through the "animal root", ancestral, of man this specification would also be valid at the level of human groups).
Thus, telepathy would be a form of prelimb... It is very likely that before the appearance of articulated language, man himself would have this possibility of communication. By defending language as a superior and much more concrete, more efficient form of communication, this ability has atrophied (by decreasing to annulment of use), remaining in a latent form in each of us. Hominids appeared a few million years ago.
Based on this data, we could say that we've been talking about 2 million years, after we've "shut down" for about 3 billion years. Proportionally, it would mean that we were talking for a few hours after a silence for several years. All this time, of course I've been communicating... We have communicated with each other in other ways, from which, the telepathic way must have had a role that cannot be neglected. Moreover, we are not original in this hypothesis, the idea of communication by telepathy before the appearance of articulated language being brought into science more by Freud and other researchers.
Information theory, quantum theory and current neurophysiology data would, according to many authors, constitute the conceptual tools by which a scientific explanation would be found for the possibility of perceiving information from a distance, outside the classically accepted paths. The view that such phenomena would defy known laws is based on a dominant "naive realism" in science before the advent of quantum physics, because the hypothesis that the transfer of information at a distance is mediated by low-frequency electromagnetic waves "does not seem to clearly contradict any physical or biological data".
In many laboratories of electronics, biotechnology, etc., in traditional universities, numerous experiments have been carried out under conditions of rigorous scientific control, subjecting to experiments both persons known to have the ability to perceive at a distance and people who did not know such "paranormal" attributes. Subjects in the laboratory were asked to describe verbally and by drawing a number of unknown, remote-located objectives (buildings, roads, landscapes) while being visited by other persons, called objective persons.
Experiments have generally demonstrated the existence of such a possibility of distance visualization within acceptable limits, sometimes surprisingly developed for both natively gifted subjects and some of the randomly chosen subjects. This category includes randomly chosen people, visitors from research institutes who have agreed to participate, scientists or other professions, who even showed distrust of the experiment. The best way to convince is to include skeptical people themselves in experiments, the experimenters note.
One of these experiments consisted of exploring long-distance viewing (several thousand kilometers). In certain locations, located at a long distance, several objectives and activities are stuned to be "seen" by 3 subjects (I give numerical details describing the experiment as concretely as possible). They did not know what location it was and certainly had not been in those places. You get 12 exact descriptions of 7 objectives and activities: 6 from one subject, 5 from another and one from the third topic. The latter, however, gave the most detailed description. The results far exceeded the calculated probability of random coincidences.
To objectify the phenomenon of remote information transfer, the experimenters used indirect evidence like THE EEC, the method of the evoked potentials, pletismography (method of exploration of peripheral circulation based on the recording of pulse variations). It thus recounts an experiment particularly rich in meanings, we would even say disturbing for understanding our psychic complexity. An EEG is performed on a subject. In another room, a person is stimulated from time to time, without the subject to which the EEG registers knowing.
And, on the EEG route appear, at the exact moment of stimulation of the second person, graphic inflections (potential evoked) that demonstrate a reception of the signal emitted in the next room. It is interesting to note that if the receiving subject (in this case, the one to whom the EEG was performed) was asked to press a button when he noticed "a foreign influence on him", he would do so at random, in discord with what the EEG route proved. Notified that he would act on it, he didn't notice anything. It was demonstrated by this experiment that the subject was unconsciously receiving the signals emitted by the transmitter.
Thus, it was concluded that the data obtained (diminishing in amplitude and desynchronization of alpha rhythm, potentially evoked) can prove the coexistence of a recording of events occurring remotely on a unconscious path. The phenomenon deserves, in our appreciation, more attention. We could extract from this the idea that many of our notions are received by us without knowing, to be aware of it.
Researchers support the same idea. It is now known, moreover, that we consciously take only a small part of the information received by the brain, most of which remain unconsciously/ subconsciously. It is no wonder, in this acceptance, that a number of ideas and discoveries in science have appeared simultaneously in several authors. Undoubtedly, the truth cannot be ruled out either that the presence of the same information at a given time can simultaneously lead several researchers to the same conclusions.
Through another experiment, rendered with all the necessary details to understand the scientific rigour of the research, a series of latethes existing in new and capacities that exceed the limits imposed by space and time were revealed. 6 subjects were chosen (S1, S2, ..., S6), of which three (S1, S2, S3) have known special skills, and the other three (S4, S5, S6) are "ordinary individuals". In the protocol of the experiment it was foreseen that each subject would be isolated with an experimenter in the laboratory (in Stanford laboratories), and at a predetermined time to be asked to describe long-distance objectives, which at that time were visiting teams formed for this purpose, objective teams.
The objective place to be visited by the objective team and to be described by the subjects in the laboratory was not known in advance by either the experimenters or the subjects. The objective team received a cardboard on which the objective was written and it was randomly removed from a safe, until then sealed by the director of the science and technology department, who in turn was foreign to the experiment. All these were measures designed to ensure maximum scientific objectivity. In concrete terms, the working phases were followed as follows: first isolate the subject with an experimenter in a room where he remained at rest for 30 minutes, after this interval began the verbal and graphic description (the subject was asked to draw) of the objective he considered to be intended to visualize at the same time as the team in the field. While a subject was thus isolated, a second experimenter requested, by means of that card, the objective place to be visited.
Another team of 2-4 experimenters was driving towards the target. In this way, neither the subject studied nor the experimenter accompanying him knew the objective of the target, thus eliminating any possibility of voluntary or involuntary communication. After 30 minutes of travel to the goal, the team stayed there for 15 minutes. During this last period of time, the subject studied was asked to verbally describe the objective and to try to execute and assistive drawings. The impressions communicated verbally were recorded on a medium, for further confrontation with reality. After the experiment followed the confrontation of the subject with the objective team. In order to enable the subject to control himself, he was also eventually brought to the scene. And here are the results of the experiment...
Subject S1 (experienced) was subjected to 9 experiments. One thing, perhaps not inconsequential, was a police commissioner. This statement "proves" a lot of ease in the correct description of buildings, roads, gardens, etc. It also correctly describes the colors of existing field objectives, ambience and activities in the area. Some field goals are even recognized and rendered as such. However, small errors occur in the description: two pools used for water filtration are considered swimming pools but the errors are more about specifying the functionality of the objectives, while the structural elements are described with great accuracy.
Subject S2 (also experienced) states that the demarcation team is in a museum. In reality, the team had set a tennis court that was about 90 metres from the indicated museum. Just as in all experiments it has been shown that the subjects render in such situations less analytical information, the information taking more concrete than abstract, there is even the possibility of intervention of the conscious who selected what seemed to him to be important, relevant. Subject S3 (also experienced) has tried to develop the ability to watch at a distance for longer. For example, a list was drawn up for training, in which randomly dictated objectives that the subject imagined to exist in the field. At the end confront the list with reality, for the control of the subject.
Researchers believe this would be the best way to train. Obviously, this subject has produced a description that corresponded exactly to reality. Let's move on to the "ordinary people"! Subject S4, for example, was a woman, by profession photographer. She did not know any particular psychological skills, and is therefore included in the experiment as an inexperienced subject. From the experiment carried out it emerged that this subject was also capable of a verbal description and by drawing close to reality. This led the researchers to appreciate that, to some extent, all people possess latent telepathic qualities that can manifest themselves in some circumstances. To shorten the description, the results were close to what could have been "matched" by simple chance, so the results were insignificant.
But don't conclude anything! Repeated use of inexperienced subjects, sometimes mere laboratory visitors or scientists in official delegations, has often revealed surprising results. After several attempts, some subjects were able to describe the goal very accurately. Without being able to explain the phenomenon, the researchers note that some subjects made descriptions of elements of the goal that did not enter the field team's field observation field, for example, describing objects that were hidden behind the back of some bushes, which could not be seen by the experimenters.
As a result of the results of the experiments, the scientists appreciate that this research "clearly shows the presence of a channel of information". There is a simple difference between the initiated (experienced) and the uninitiated subjects: the latter achieve more "sporadic and vague" results. Hence the researchers' hypothetical conclusion that, "remote viewing could be a faculty of latent perception with wide distribution." And, it's all just a matter of training, of "demanding" time to use such qualities. But the study did not allow researchers to understand "the nature of the information-carrying signal that a subject perceives during remote viewing."
The subjects stated that they "see" the objective as if it were in front of them, but in a perspective that allows a description inaccessible to the one on the ground. Statistically, subjects were more able to describe a long-distance goal than to "hit" a number chosen from a randomly fixed string.
The observation could explain, according to the researchers, why there are greater successes in experiments involving affective experiences than those with figures, playing cards or Zener figures. A small detail, the researchers criminalize the role of memory and imagination as "sources of noise" (information jamming). Here are some interpretive "spices" recorded during the experiments: the mud left by the tide in the harbour has been described as "an area of condensed lava", as "a wrinkled elephant skin" covering the terrain, or a children's rocking chair has been "seen" as an "iron triangle".
And, following studies, the researchers hypothesized that the skills tested could have the "perception" seat in the left cerebral hemisphere (there is an increase in EG activity especially alpha in the moments of "perception") and that of "creative" interpretation and playback/ "interpretative without concrete" in the right hemisphere (for right-handed - for left-handed reverses), this right hemisphere being "specialized" in spatial elabations. This hypothesis, in its entirety, is increasingly confirmed by studies, and there are even statements such as "science on the left and art on the right".
Furthermore, studies have also revealed a particularly surprising phenomenon on the ability to anticipate some of the subjects. In this respect, multiple correct descriptions were made by subjects before the objective was chosen. In the protocol of the experiment, the subject was expected to begin the description of the goal 20 minutes before it was chosen and 35 minutes before the experiment team reached the field. The description was to be completed 5 minutes before the goal was made. All referees found an unexpected consistency between the descriptions made in advance and the objectives subsequently visited by the teams of experimenters.
So the researchers called the phenomenon "remote and temporal viewing." In its explanation, the researchers start from the idea that the concept of causality cannot be an absolute law, since there may be "diversion processes", i.e. deviations from the law. Causality being a "statistical truth" satisfies "average" situations (in the mean sense) and allows exceptions. The prediction phenomenon would thus be an exception that "relativizes space and time". The sequence of events over time is reversed, as if "events that have not yet occurred could cause a perception in the present." Moreover, there is talk of the presence of "advanced waves" which "could in some cases constitute a carrier of precognitive information of an event".
This "observation" is confirmed by recent studies regarding quantum processes taking place in neuronal microtubules. "Overbidding" methods of protection and elimination of "interference", the researchers concluded that the phenomenon of remote viewing is neither functionof the distance nor influenced by the shielding through the Faraday cage (which constitutes a screen for any kind of electromagnetic radiation). The information given by the subjects is mainly non-analytical, the subjects rendering the shape, volume, color, rather than the name or functionality of the objective.
Hence the suggestion that this kind of perception is the left hemisphere, analytical, dominant that "delivers" information to the right hemisphere, the conscious, the non-dominant. Then, from the finding that results have been obtained, albeit not of the same quality, and in randomly chosen subjects, the researchers hypothesize that, "remote viewing may be a latent and widely distributed perceptive capacity, but repressed" (I repeat myself in order to retain this "detail").
In conclusion, the phenomenon studied is compatible with modern scientific thinking, the results being, undeniably, scientifically certified, can be reproduced at will and statistically proven (if desired), conditions imposed by modern science for the authentication of this phenomenon.
But, nevertheless, I will continue the presentations "entering" a little and the "territory" of the Russian school (and not only).
But, that in the upcoming post (arrive for now)!
In summarizing some of the ones presented in previous posts, we note a series of observations that appear to demonstrate the existence of a possibility of communication throughout the living world through an energy field emitted by the body: communication between cells of a tissue, between human organisms (two or more - including of all individuals of a species), between man and plants and between man and microorganisms.
Everything that is alive emits and receives information on a specific code, probably to each species or to the living world itself in its entirety. If we found the key to this code, this universal language that expresses life, we would get the opportunity to "communicate" with any living person (especially ourselves or our fellows) with unsuspected "useful" possibilities even under the conditions of an intuitive language. What seems to us to be new, unknown until now, is the existence of the possibility to communicate, i.e. to emit, receive and process information throughout the living world, regardless of the philogenic step in which it is located, therefore, regardless of the level of development of the nervous system.
This property seems to us so specific to the living world that we believe that it can be added to the common laws of organization of living matter. The very essence of the living we believe that we could express it through the possibility of communicating, of achieving unity with the environment and, through successive levels of integration, with the whole living world.
The energetic mediation of human relations requires, in theory, another basis in understanding psychic phenomena. Some psychic experiences outside of open states (in the considerations so far of classical psychology - and, which we will talk about later) can find scientific explanation viewed from this prism. We believe that this possibility of communication, of information transfer between individuals, is much more pronounced in the world without articulated language.
We could not thus explain a lot of appropriate acts of conduct bearing the seal of a "rational understanding" present in the world of animals inferior to man. Beyond a series of gestures, sounds, smells, which have a certain meaning for animals, complex actions of group leadership, distribution of group role, undertaking of joint actions, it would be possible to carry out on this path (implicitly, through the "animal root", ancestral, of man this specification would also be valid at the level of human groups).
Thus, telepathy would be a form of prelimb... It is very likely that before the appearance of articulated language, man himself would have this possibility of communication. By defending language as a superior and much more concrete, more efficient form of communication, this ability has atrophied (by decreasing to annulment of use), remaining in a latent form in each of us. Hominids appeared a few million years ago.
Based on this data, we could say that we've been talking about 2 million years, after we've "shut down" for about 3 billion years. Proportionally, it would mean that we were talking for a few hours after a silence for several years. All this time, of course I've been communicating... We have communicated with each other in other ways, from which, the telepathic way must have had a role that cannot be neglected. Moreover, we are not original in this hypothesis, the idea of communication by telepathy before the appearance of articulated language being brought into science more by Freud and other researchers.
Information theory, quantum theory and current neurophysiology data would, according to many authors, constitute the conceptual tools by which a scientific explanation would be found for the possibility of perceiving information from a distance, outside the classically accepted paths. The view that such phenomena would defy known laws is based on a dominant "naive realism" in science before the advent of quantum physics, because the hypothesis that the transfer of information at a distance is mediated by low-frequency electromagnetic waves "does not seem to clearly contradict any physical or biological data".
In many laboratories of electronics, biotechnology, etc., in traditional universities, numerous experiments have been carried out under conditions of rigorous scientific control, subjecting to experiments both persons known to have the ability to perceive at a distance and people who did not know such "paranormal" attributes. Subjects in the laboratory were asked to describe verbally and by drawing a number of unknown, remote-located objectives (buildings, roads, landscapes) while being visited by other persons, called objective persons.
Experiments have generally demonstrated the existence of such a possibility of distance visualization within acceptable limits, sometimes surprisingly developed for both natively gifted subjects and some of the randomly chosen subjects. This category includes randomly chosen people, visitors from research institutes who have agreed to participate, scientists or other professions, who even showed distrust of the experiment. The best way to convince is to include skeptical people themselves in experiments, the experimenters note.
One of these experiments consisted of exploring long-distance viewing (several thousand kilometers). In certain locations, located at a long distance, several objectives and activities are stuned to be "seen" by 3 subjects (I give numerical details describing the experiment as concretely as possible). They did not know what location it was and certainly had not been in those places. You get 12 exact descriptions of 7 objectives and activities: 6 from one subject, 5 from another and one from the third topic. The latter, however, gave the most detailed description. The results far exceeded the calculated probability of random coincidences.
To objectify the phenomenon of remote information transfer, the experimenters used indirect evidence like THE EEC, the method of the evoked potentials, pletismography (method of exploration of peripheral circulation based on the recording of pulse variations). It thus recounts an experiment particularly rich in meanings, we would even say disturbing for understanding our psychic complexity. An EEG is performed on a subject. In another room, a person is stimulated from time to time, without the subject to which the EEG registers knowing.
And, on the EEG route appear, at the exact moment of stimulation of the second person, graphic inflections (potential evoked) that demonstrate a reception of the signal emitted in the next room. It is interesting to note that if the receiving subject (in this case, the one to whom the EEG was performed) was asked to press a button when he noticed "a foreign influence on him", he would do so at random, in discord with what the EEG route proved. Notified that he would act on it, he didn't notice anything. It was demonstrated by this experiment that the subject was unconsciously receiving the signals emitted by the transmitter.
Thus, it was concluded that the data obtained (diminishing in amplitude and desynchronization of alpha rhythm, potentially evoked) can prove the coexistence of a recording of events occurring remotely on a unconscious path. The phenomenon deserves, in our appreciation, more attention. We could extract from this the idea that many of our notions are received by us without knowing, to be aware of it.
Researchers support the same idea. It is now known, moreover, that we consciously take only a small part of the information received by the brain, most of which remain unconsciously/ subconsciously. It is no wonder, in this acceptance, that a number of ideas and discoveries in science have appeared simultaneously in several authors. Undoubtedly, the truth cannot be ruled out either that the presence of the same information at a given time can simultaneously lead several researchers to the same conclusions.
Through another experiment, rendered with all the necessary details to understand the scientific rigour of the research, a series of latethes existing in new and capacities that exceed the limits imposed by space and time were revealed. 6 subjects were chosen (S1, S2, ..., S6), of which three (S1, S2, S3) have known special skills, and the other three (S4, S5, S6) are "ordinary individuals". In the protocol of the experiment it was foreseen that each subject would be isolated with an experimenter in the laboratory (in Stanford laboratories), and at a predetermined time to be asked to describe long-distance objectives, which at that time were visiting teams formed for this purpose, objective teams.
The objective place to be visited by the objective team and to be described by the subjects in the laboratory was not known in advance by either the experimenters or the subjects. The objective team received a cardboard on which the objective was written and it was randomly removed from a safe, until then sealed by the director of the science and technology department, who in turn was foreign to the experiment. All these were measures designed to ensure maximum scientific objectivity. In concrete terms, the working phases were followed as follows: first isolate the subject with an experimenter in a room where he remained at rest for 30 minutes, after this interval began the verbal and graphic description (the subject was asked to draw) of the objective he considered to be intended to visualize at the same time as the team in the field. While a subject was thus isolated, a second experimenter requested, by means of that card, the objective place to be visited.
Another team of 2-4 experimenters was driving towards the target. In this way, neither the subject studied nor the experimenter accompanying him knew the objective of the target, thus eliminating any possibility of voluntary or involuntary communication. After 30 minutes of travel to the goal, the team stayed there for 15 minutes. During this last period of time, the subject studied was asked to verbally describe the objective and to try to execute and assistive drawings. The impressions communicated verbally were recorded on a medium, for further confrontation with reality. After the experiment followed the confrontation of the subject with the objective team. In order to enable the subject to control himself, he was also eventually brought to the scene. And here are the results of the experiment...
Subject S1 (experienced) was subjected to 9 experiments. One thing, perhaps not inconsequential, was a police commissioner. This statement "proves" a lot of ease in the correct description of buildings, roads, gardens, etc. It also correctly describes the colors of existing field objectives, ambience and activities in the area. Some field goals are even recognized and rendered as such. However, small errors occur in the description: two pools used for water filtration are considered swimming pools but the errors are more about specifying the functionality of the objectives, while the structural elements are described with great accuracy.
Subject S2 (also experienced) states that the demarcation team is in a museum. In reality, the team had set a tennis court that was about 90 metres from the indicated museum. Just as in all experiments it has been shown that the subjects render in such situations less analytical information, the information taking more concrete than abstract, there is even the possibility of intervention of the conscious who selected what seemed to him to be important, relevant. Subject S3 (also experienced) has tried to develop the ability to watch at a distance for longer. For example, a list was drawn up for training, in which randomly dictated objectives that the subject imagined to exist in the field. At the end confront the list with reality, for the control of the subject.
Researchers believe this would be the best way to train. Obviously, this subject has produced a description that corresponded exactly to reality. Let's move on to the "ordinary people"! Subject S4, for example, was a woman, by profession photographer. She did not know any particular psychological skills, and is therefore included in the experiment as an inexperienced subject. From the experiment carried out it emerged that this subject was also capable of a verbal description and by drawing close to reality. This led the researchers to appreciate that, to some extent, all people possess latent telepathic qualities that can manifest themselves in some circumstances. To shorten the description, the results were close to what could have been "matched" by simple chance, so the results were insignificant.
But don't conclude anything! Repeated use of inexperienced subjects, sometimes mere laboratory visitors or scientists in official delegations, has often revealed surprising results. After several attempts, some subjects were able to describe the goal very accurately. Without being able to explain the phenomenon, the researchers note that some subjects made descriptions of elements of the goal that did not enter the field team's field observation field, for example, describing objects that were hidden behind the back of some bushes, which could not be seen by the experimenters.
As a result of the results of the experiments, the scientists appreciate that this research "clearly shows the presence of a channel of information". There is a simple difference between the initiated (experienced) and the uninitiated subjects: the latter achieve more "sporadic and vague" results. Hence the researchers' hypothetical conclusion that, "remote viewing could be a faculty of latent perception with wide distribution." And, it's all just a matter of training, of "demanding" time to use such qualities. But the study did not allow researchers to understand "the nature of the information-carrying signal that a subject perceives during remote viewing."
The subjects stated that they "see" the objective as if it were in front of them, but in a perspective that allows a description inaccessible to the one on the ground. Statistically, subjects were more able to describe a long-distance goal than to "hit" a number chosen from a randomly fixed string.
The observation could explain, according to the researchers, why there are greater successes in experiments involving affective experiences than those with figures, playing cards or Zener figures. A small detail, the researchers criminalize the role of memory and imagination as "sources of noise" (information jamming). Here are some interpretive "spices" recorded during the experiments: the mud left by the tide in the harbour has been described as "an area of condensed lava", as "a wrinkled elephant skin" covering the terrain, or a children's rocking chair has been "seen" as an "iron triangle".
And, following studies, the researchers hypothesized that the skills tested could have the "perception" seat in the left cerebral hemisphere (there is an increase in EG activity especially alpha in the moments of "perception") and that of "creative" interpretation and playback/ "interpretative without concrete" in the right hemisphere (for right-handed - for left-handed reverses), this right hemisphere being "specialized" in spatial elabations. This hypothesis, in its entirety, is increasingly confirmed by studies, and there are even statements such as "science on the left and art on the right".
Furthermore, studies have also revealed a particularly surprising phenomenon on the ability to anticipate some of the subjects. In this respect, multiple correct descriptions were made by subjects before the objective was chosen. In the protocol of the experiment, the subject was expected to begin the description of the goal 20 minutes before it was chosen and 35 minutes before the experiment team reached the field. The description was to be completed 5 minutes before the goal was made. All referees found an unexpected consistency between the descriptions made in advance and the objectives subsequently visited by the teams of experimenters.
So the researchers called the phenomenon "remote and temporal viewing." In its explanation, the researchers start from the idea that the concept of causality cannot be an absolute law, since there may be "diversion processes", i.e. deviations from the law. Causality being a "statistical truth" satisfies "average" situations (in the mean sense) and allows exceptions. The prediction phenomenon would thus be an exception that "relativizes space and time". The sequence of events over time is reversed, as if "events that have not yet occurred could cause a perception in the present." Moreover, there is talk of the presence of "advanced waves" which "could in some cases constitute a carrier of precognitive information of an event".
This "observation" is confirmed by recent studies regarding quantum processes taking place in neuronal microtubules. "Overbidding" methods of protection and elimination of "interference", the researchers concluded that the phenomenon of remote viewing is neither functionof the distance nor influenced by the shielding through the Faraday cage (which constitutes a screen for any kind of electromagnetic radiation). The information given by the subjects is mainly non-analytical, the subjects rendering the shape, volume, color, rather than the name or functionality of the objective.
Hence the suggestion that this kind of perception is the left hemisphere, analytical, dominant that "delivers" information to the right hemisphere, the conscious, the non-dominant. Then, from the finding that results have been obtained, albeit not of the same quality, and in randomly chosen subjects, the researchers hypothesize that, "remote viewing may be a latent and widely distributed perceptive capacity, but repressed" (I repeat myself in order to retain this "detail").
In conclusion, the phenomenon studied is compatible with modern scientific thinking, the results being, undeniably, scientifically certified, can be reproduced at will and statistically proven (if desired), conditions imposed by modern science for the authentication of this phenomenon.
But, nevertheless, I will continue the presentations "entering" a little and the "territory" of the Russian school (and not only).
But, that in the upcoming post (arrive for now)!
Love,
Gratitude and Understanding!!!
Dorin, Merticaru