What is a Near Death Experience?

Source: http://www.horizonresearch.org/main_nav_pages.php?cat_id=62

Home » Near Death Experiences

Near Death Experiences

Article 1, NDE series

                   

What is a near death experience or NDE ?

Is it possible to die and be revived back to life? Even though the idea may seem contradictory at first, this is precisely what has been happening more and more due to the progress of resuscitation science. Over the past 50 years many people have been brought back to life after they had died, and some have had very intense life changing experiences.

But what exactly is an NDE? Since the earliest times, in many cultures, there have been accounts of unusual experiences reported by those who have come close to death or in a situation of physical or emotional crisis giving rise to a pattern of perceptions, creating a recognizable overall event, that has been called an NDE. Though being in a life-threatening situation or having a cardiac arrest does not, by itself, constitute an NDE, since the term is used to describe specific cognitive1 experiences and sensations such as including detachment from the body, total serenity, security…

It is thus no surprise that during the last twenty or thirty years, media outlets have been replete with articles on these accounts and that they have become the source of many debates and controversies all over the world. For the mystery of death has always fascinated mankind and rarely if ever, are people indifferent to such a topic.

Yet, it wasn't really until the 1970s that this subject entered the realms of science and the term NDE was used for the first time. This occurred after Raymond Moody, an American psychiatrist with a background in philosophy, published his best selling book "Life after life", in which he had collected the accounts given by 150 survivors of near death encounters which he obtained while a medical student.

Remarkably, he found that the survivors had all described similar unusual experiences. These included:

i) feeling peace;

ii) having a life review;

iii) seeing a tunnel;

iv) seeing a bright light;

v) seeing deceased relatives;

vi) having a perception of separation from the body (out of body experience)

vii) entering a heavenly domain.

The experiences were usually described from a time when the individual had been unconscious, reason why Moody termed anyone of these experiences “a near death experience” or NDE.

Obviously controversies abound regarding the causes of an NDE. Some believe an NDE can offer glimpses of the afterlife and will feel it is an opportunity to learn more about the mysteries of human existence. Others instead have a more skeptical approach and think an NDE is just an illusion which can be explained in scientific terms (for example brought about by an excess of carbon dioxide etc…). Their curiosity usually arises from wanting to find out the latest on the brain’s tricks or it may just be plain scientific curiosity.

Moving beyond controversy, perhaps, the most striking aspect of an NDE is not so much the features briefly summarized above, but rather the transformation those who have experienced it first hand, usually undergo. An NDE often leaves a person with a positive life effect making him or her more altruistic, more pious, less materialistic and less afraid of death. Surely, these long lasting and deep changes in attitudes and behaviors following an NDE are a reality that can be socially observed unlike the more personal (subjective) experiences we have referred to above. Now, given the NDE phenomenon’s positive impact on people’s lives, it undoubtedly calls for further research.

The NDE articles present in this web site will allow you to have a thorough overview of the NDE phenomenon, its frequency, theories of causation, the influence of personality, religion and culture, and obviously we will refer or describe studies carried out so far on the subject.

---------------------------

1Cognitive experiences : refer to experiences dealing with cognition, in other words to the mental process of knowing, formulating judgments, reasoning, perceiving and being aware.

31:01:2013 -- The Aware Sudy

Dear Friends,

http://www.horizonresearch.org/main_page.php?cat_id=38

Be Well.

The AWARE Study

The AWARE (AWAreness during REsuscitation) study is the first launched by the Human Consciousness Project, a multidisciplinary collaboration of international scientists and physicians who have joined forces to study the relationship between mind and brain during clinical death, and is led by Dr. Sam Parnia, a world-renowned expert on the study of the human mind and consciousness during clinical death, together with Dr Peter Fenwick and Professors Stephen Holgate and Robert Peveler of the University of Southampton. The team will be working in collaboration with more than 25 major medical centers throughout Europe, Canada, and the United States.

Although the study of death has traditionally been considered a subject for theology or philosophy, recent advances in medicine have finally enabled a scientific approach to understanding the ultimate mystery facing humankind. “Contrary to popular perception,” Dr. Parnia explains, “death is not a specific moment. It is actually a process that begins when the heart stops beating, the lungs stop working, and the brain ceases functioning – a medical condition termed cardiac arrest, which from a biological viewpoint is synonymous with clinical death.”

“During a cardiac arrest, all three criteria of death are present. Subsequently, there is a period of time, ranging from a few seconds to an hour or longer, in which emergency medical efforts may succeed in restarting the heart and reversing the dying process. What people experience during this period of cardiac arrest provides a unique window of understanding into what we are all likely to experience during the dying process.”

A number of recent scientific studies carried out by independent researchers have demonstrated that 10-20 per cent of people who go through cardiac arrest and clinical death report lucid, well structured thought processes, reasoning, memories, and sometimes detailed recall of events during their encounter with death.

“The remarkable point about these experiences,” according to Dr. Parnia, “is that while studies of the brain during cardiac arrest have consistently shown that there is no measurable brain activity, these subjects have reported detailed perceptions that indicate the contrary—namely, a high level of consciousness in the absence of detectable brain activity. If we can objectively verify these claims, the results would bear profound implications not only for the scientific community, but for the way in which we understand and relate to life and death as a society.”

During the AWARE study, physicians will use the latest technologies to study the brain and consciousness during cardiac arrest. At the same time, they will also be testing the validity of out of body experiences and claims of being able to see and hear during cardiac arrest through the use of randomly generated hidden images that are not visible unless viewed from specific vantage points above.

The study is being funded by the UK Resuscitation Council, the Horizon Research Foundation, and the Nour Foundation in the United States.

31:01.2013 -- Collide-a-Scape ... Part I + II

Dear Friends,

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/collideascape/2013/01/29/is-the-anthropocene-doomed/#.UQrFSr-CSSp

Part II is here;

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/collideascape/?p=10256#.UQrGCL-CSSo

Be Well.

David

Collide-a-Scape

« New Study on Extinction Elicits the View from SomewhereWhy You Should Root For Clean Coal »

Is the Anthropocene Doomed?

By Keith Kloor | January 29, 2013 3:10 pm

It’s not often that an aging social movement gets a chance to redefine and reinvigorate itself. Environmentalism has that opportunity now, with the Anthropocene, which National Geographic has dubbed, The Age of Man. What does that mean? As I recently wrote in Slate, the Anthropocene represents a growing scientific consensus that the contemporary human footprint—our cities, suburban sprawl, dams, agriculture, greenhouse gases, etc.—has so massively transformed the planet as to usher in a new geological epoch.

This sounds like The Age of Man is bad for humanity and the earth. But that’s too simplistic. As The Economist noted in its 2011 cover story:

The advent of the Anthropocene promises more, though, than a scientific nicety or a new way of grabbing the eco-jaded public’s attention. The term “paradigm shift” is bandied around with promiscuous ease. But for the natural sciences to make human activity central to its conception of the world, rather than a distraction, would mark such a shift for real.

The question is, what would this new paradigm shift signify? Might it offer a fresh new lens to view the future? Or will it merely reinforce the bleak view that environmentalists have held for the past 40 years?

The answer to that rides on the narrative that emerges from the public discourse on the Anthropocene.

This is where environmental scientists, green activists and eco-minded writers come in. They are the ones that shape the meta-narrative, which the media picks up on and amplifies. By that measure, the chances for a re-imagined environmentalism are small.

As I said in that Slate piece, leading earth scientists

publish high-profile papers warning “that population growth, widespread destruction of natural ecosystems, and climate change may be driving Earth” to an irreversible tipping point. They issue reports from prestigious science societies warning about a finite planet being run into the ground. Some hold glitzy, international symposiums that put humanity on a mock trial for the global imprint of its civilization.

The common thread: The Anthropocene is an unmitigated disaster. Humans are planet wreckers. Time is running out for us. 

This was the general picture that Will Steffen portrayed in his keynote speech at the recent Anthropocene Project conference in Berlin. (I love that title; it sounds like a Robert Ludlum thriller.)

Steffen, to his credit, didn’t overplay the collapse theme. He didn’t say doomsday was knocking at the door. However, he did make it clear that he believed the ominous footsteps of peak oil, resource scarcity, runaway climate change, and the “sixth extinction” were edging closer and that we should not ignore them.

Steffen is actually much sunnier than the grim voices that tend to frame environmental discourse.

Like that of Chris Hedges, who, several years ago, wrote in the magazine that triggered Occupy Wall Street:

We stand on the cusp of one of the bleakest periods in human history when the bright lights of a civilization blink out and we will descend for decades, if not centuries, into barbarity.

Or like that of Paul Kingsnorth, the British environmentalist who has retreated into his own private Edenic wilderness, where he lauds theUnabomber in the glossy pages of Orion magazine:

Unlike many other critics of the technosphere, who are busy churning out books and doing the lecture circuit and updating their anarcho-primitivist websites, [Ted] Kaczynski wasn’t just theorizing about being a revolutionary. He meant it.

He sure did!

You have to admit, it doesn’t sound as if people like Hedges and Kingsnorth are keen on the Anthropocene. Are they outliers or merely representative of a darker strain of environmentalism? Perhaps for a larger perspective we should turn to a respected elder statesman, someone with stature in the Big Nature world– like David Attenborough, who recently called humanity a “plague on the earth.”

Oops. Let’s move on.

Maybe the UK’s Royal Society, an august scientific institution, can inject a little sanity into this discussion. It just so happens that Paul and Ann Ehrlich have recently posed a relevant question in a paper the Royal Society published. It’s called,  “Can a collapse of global civilization be avoided?”

That would be important to know. Let’s find out what they have to say:

Environmental problems have contributed to numerous collapses of civilizations in the past. Now, for the first time, a global collapse appears likely.

Damn. Maybe Kingsnorth in his Orion piece isn’t such an outlier, after all. He writes:

Our civilization is beginning to break down. We are at the start of an unfolding economic and social collapse, which may take decades or longer to play out—and which is playing out against the background of a planetary ecocide that nobody seems able to prevent.

At this point, you might be asking: Are there any signs of light in this dark and utterly depressing view of humanity’s future? Fortunately, there is, as I discussed here. I’ve also become enchanted with a group of young scholars at Stanford, who are not taking predictions of doomsday at face value. Bless their hearts, they even seem to think that “the narrative of apocalypse has changed in the shadow of the Anthropocene.”

If only.

[This is the first of a two-part exploration of the Anthropocene discourse. Part two will be posted tomorrow.]

CATEGORIZED UNDER: ANTHROPOCENE, CLIMATE CHANGE, ECOCIDE, ECOLOGY, ENVIRONMENTALISM

MORE ABOUT: ANTHROPOCENE, CLIMATE CHANGE, COLLAPSE, DOOMSDAY, ECOLOGY,ENVIRONMENTALISM

Part II

What Should the Anthropocene Look Like?

By Keith Kloor | January 30, 2013 3:06 pm

Nearly two decades ago, an environmental historian published a scholarly essay that enraged the environmental community. William Cronon, author of the seminal Changes in the Land (a book that deeply influenced me and manyothers) and the brilliant (equally influential) Nature’s Metropolis: Chicago and the Great West, began his provocative essay this way:

The time has come to rethink wilderness.

This will seem a heretical claim to many environmentalists, since the idea of wilderness has for decades been a fundamental tenet—indeed, a passion—of the environmental movement, especially in the United States. For many Americans wilderness stands as the last remaining place where civilization, that all too human disease, has not fully infected the earth. It is an island in the polluted sea of urban-industrial modernity, the one place we can turn for escape from our own too-muchness. Seen in this way, wilderness presents itself as the best antidote to our human selves, a refuge we must somehow recover if we hope to save the planet. As Henry David Thoreau once famously declared, “In Wildness is the preservation of the World.”

But is it? The more one knows of its peculiar history, the more one realizes that wilderness is not quite what it seems. Far from being the one place on earth that stands apart from humanity, it is quite profoundly a human creation—indeed, the creation of very particular human cultures at very particular moments in human history. It is not a pristine sanctuary where the last remnant of an untouched, endangered, but still transcendent nature can for at least a little while longer be encountered without the contaminating taint of civilization. Instead, it’s a product of that civilization, and could hardly be contaminated by the very stuff of which it is made. Wilderness hides its unnaturalness behind a mask that is all the more beguiling because it seems so natural. As we gaze into the mirror it holds up for us, we too easily imagine that what we behold is Nature when in fact we see the reflection of our own unexamined longings and desires. For this reason, we mistake ourselves when we suppose that wilderness can be the solution to our culture’s problematic relationships with the nonhuman world, for wilderness is itself no small part of the problem.

It’s a long, trenchant piece that was first excerpted (clumsily, I believe) in theNew York Times magazine. It immediately triggered a furor (which I have previously discussed). Since then, a modernist green perspective has emerged, further challenging outdated environmentalist metaphors and orthodoxy. As I wrote in Slate last month, this modernist green outlook has a “broader ecological view.”

It is unclear if traditional, mainstream environmentalists (who drive the environmental discourse and agenda) will be able to escape their nature-centric legacy and put the needs of people on an equal footing. This is not to say that environmental groups ignore important societal concerns. Obviously, public health issues (such as pollution) are a big part of environmental activism.

But make no mistake, groups like the Nature Conservancy, Environmental Defense Fund, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Sierra Club, and the Wilderness Society are in the business of protecting nature. Mind you, I think that’s important business. There should be devoted watchdogs with clout who are looking after nature. After all, this often translates into the protection of vital ecosystems, watersheds, prairies, forests, rivers, animals and plants. And yes, wilderness, too–even if that is something we created as an unnatural sanctuary to commune with nature. I like to escape to wild places, either via a raft or a meandering hike. I like vacationing inCanyonlands and Yosemite with my family. I spent a sizable chunk of my career as an editor at an environmental magazine.

So I don’t want environmental groups to go out of business. I don’t want them to stop caring about nature.

But, paraphrasing Cronon, I would like them to rethink nature for theAnthropocene. It’s not my job to say what nature should mean in a world shaped primarily by humans–I’m still working it out, myself–but I knowothers feel this is a discussion we should be having. I’m also not the only one who thinks environmental discourse and policy should stop being dominatedby “horror stories.”

Why is this important for the future of environmentalism, as I recentlyindicated? The journalist Paul Voosen scratches the surface here:

Over the past few years, the Anthropocene has become a defining idea of environmentalism. It does much in little space. It ends the separation of humanity from nature. It changes the discussion for a politicized electorate weary of global warming. It broadens the tent, encircling a host of realities: biodiversity loss, resource scarcity, population growth.

In other words, the nature/human dichotomy that has animated environmentalism since its inception no longer applies. This is a point that I made recently to Jon Christensen’s UCLA class, Environmental Communications in the Anthropocene, when I visited there several weeks ago.

What this entails is something that I think environmentally-minded people are grappling with at the moment. There’s an ambivalence about the Anthropocene that is palpable. I saw it in Jon’s class when the subject of my controversial Slate essay came up and he asked students if they considered themselves modernist or traditionalist-minded greens. The ratio was split roughly 50-50. As Andrew Revkin said in his New York Times Dot Earth blog:

Taking full ownership of the Anthropocene won’t be easy. The necessary feeling is a queasy mix of excitement and unease.

This is made all the more difficult because many of us have a complicated relationship with science and technology. The Anthropocene forces us to think hard about genetically modified crops, nuclear power, and perhaps most important of all, an underlying tenet of contemporary environmentalism–the precautionary principle, which the French sociologist Bruno Latour and others believe we should reconsider. How many environmentalists are ready to go that far? I’m betting not many.

Jon Foley, the director of the Institute on the Environment at the University of Minnesota, has a new essay that challenges the strategies and priorities of environmentalists. He starts off:

We are supposed to be in the business of changing the world. The question is: Are we?

I think an even better question–perhaps one Jon will take up in a future essay–is: What do we want to change the world to? That’s the million dollar question the Anthropocene suggests to me.

Source/IGBP

[This is the second of a two part meditation on the Anthropocene. Part one is here.]

31:01:2013 -- First time-travel movies reveal surreal universe

Dear Friends,

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/nstv/2013/01/first-time-travel-movies-reveal-surreal-universe.html

Be Well.

David

First time-travel movies reveal surreal universe

17:56 31 January 2013

Animation

Exclusives

One-Minute Math

One-Minute Physics

Physics and Math

Time travel in the real world isn't yet possible. But thanks to new physics flicks, you can now experience an alternate universe to see what it might look like.

Developed by Wolfgang Schleich and colleagues at the University of Ulm in Germany, these first time-travel videos mathematically recreate the weird world of Gödel's universe. In the first clip, a camera is placed at the centre of this cylindrical universe, simulating what an Earth-like object would look like. Because light behaves differently in this space, as the sphere moves away from you, you see an image of both the front and the back. If it moves above you, it appears as a collection of slices. During its orbit, you see many versions from different time periods all at once.

The video gets even more trippy as it simulates what you would see when looking up at a ball. Because the universe is rotating, light rays move in spirals, creating circular echoes around the object. If a single ball is replaced by a stack, you see all the balls at once.

Of course the visualisation isn't complete without a taste of time travel. The last clip follows a bizarre ball as it meets a younger version of itself, then ages.

For more about the simulation, check out our article "First real time-travel movies are loopers".

If you enjoyed this post, see how to build a time machine or check out how the universe emerged from nothing.

30:01:2013 -- The Holographic Universe

Dear Friends,

Is it live or is it Memorex?...

http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2013/01/the-holographic-universe.html

Be Well.

David

The Holographic Universe

In the 1950s and 60s inventor Dennis Gabor discovered that when you photograph objects with a split light beam and store the information as wave interference patterns, you get a better image than with ordinary point-to-point intensity photographs.  Not only is the captured image clearer, but it is completely three dimensional. 

“In a classic laser hologram, a laser beam is split.  One portion is reflected off an object – a china teacup, say – the other is reflected by several mirrors.  They are then reunited and captured on a piece of photographic film.  The result on the plate – which represents the interference pattern of these waves – resembles nothing more than a set of squiggles or concentric circles.  However, when you shine a light beam from the same kind of laser through the film, what you see is a fully realized, incredibly detailed, three-dimensional virtual image of the china teacup floating in space (an example of this is the image of Princess Leia which gets generated by R2D2 in the first movie of the Star Wars series).”  -Lynne McTaggart, “The Field: The Quest for the Secret Force of the Universe,” (83)

“A hologram is produced when a single laser light is split into two separate beams.  The first beam is bounced off the object to be photographed.  Then the second beam is allowed to collide with the reflected light of the first.  When this happens they create an interference pattern which is then recorded on a piece of film … as soon as another laser beam is shined through the film, a three-dimensional image of the original object reappears.  The three-dimensionality of such images is often eerily convincing.  You can actually walk around a holographic projection and view it from different angles as you would a real object.  However, if you reach out and try to touch it, your hand will waft right through it and you will discover there is really nothing there.”  -Michael Talbot, “The Holographic Universe” (14-15)

The three-dimensionality of holographic images is not their only amazing attribute.  In holograms, all parts are reflected in the whole and the whole is reflected in all parts, so if you chop a piece of holographic film into tiny bits then shine a laser onto any of them, no matter how small, you will still get a complete image.

“Back in the 1980s, a series of bookmarks appeared on the market using holographic technology.  Each one was made of a shiny strip of silver paper that looked like glossy aluminum foil at first glance.  When the paper was held directly under a bright light and tilted back and forth, however … Suddenly, the images in the foil looked as though they’d come to life and were hovering in the air just above the paper itself … If you have one of these bookmarks, you can do an experiment to demonstrate for yourself just how a hologram works … use a sharp pair of scissors to cut your beautiful, shiny bookmark into hundreds of pieces of any shape.  Then, take the smallest of the fragments and cut it again into an even tinier piece.  If the bookmark is truly a hologram, you’ll be able to look at your tiny speck of a bookmark under a magnifying glass and still see the entire image, only on a smaller scale.  The reason why is that it exists everywhere throughout the bookmark.”  -Gregg Braden, “The Divine Matrix” (104-5)

The “physical” world around us behaves much like a hologram. Just like a piece of holographic film, all quanta exist as interfering wave patterns.  In and of themselves, these interference waves have no “solidity” – no definite properties or location – just like the squiggles/circles on holographic film.  The image is distributed throughout the entire film, just as quanta are distributed throughout the entire universe.  Then when a laser beam (the light of consciousness) is directed at those interference waves, seemingly solid particles (three dimensional images) appear before our eyes.  One of the first physicists to consider this “cosmic hologram” metaphor was David Bohm who defined the universe as an “undivided wholeness in flowing motion” which he termed the “holomovement.”

“Einstein’s protégé, American physicist David Bohm, felt that quantum theory suggested the existence of a deeper reality than the one presented by our senses.  He dubbed the implicate order an undivided holistic realm that is beyond concepts like spacetime, matter, or energy.  In the implicate order everything is fully enfolded or entangled with everything else.  By contrast, the explicate order world of ordinary observations and common sense emerge, or unfold, out of the implicate order.  Bohm used a hologram as a metaphor to illustrate how information about a whole system can be enfolded into an implicit structure, any part of which reflects the whole.”  -Dean Radin, “Entangled Minds” (254)

Bohm’s implicate order is analogous to the two dimensional piece of holographic film and the explicate order is analogous to the three dimensional holographic image.  The implicate order is the underlying undivided wholeness of the universe and the explicate order is the multitude of seemingly separate forms.  To illustrate this duality, consider the following passages from my book Asbestos Head:

“If you blur your vision enough, forms disappear and you are left with nothing but a mass of color in motion.  There is no word that describes the blur, but perhaps you make one up.  Then you make a habit of making up words for blurs and start recognizing similarities - you label tree blurs,rock blurs, other animal blurs and maybe even atom blurs.  This allows you to compare and categorize, make judgments, and express artistic concerns about the blurs, but the fact remains that the boundaries between blurs are perceptual, not actual.  We know no two trees, rocks, animals, or atoms are exactly alike, but if no two things are exactly alike, we have no way to measure what constitutes one thing or it’s other.  If no two things are exactly alike then there must be only one true form that is everything (i.e. the universal hologram)

We know that sub-atomic particles are constantly in motion, but on a smaller scale than we can perceive.  We know that the planet beneath us is constantly in motion, but on a larger scale than we can perceive.  We know the Universe is perpetually changing and in motion, but we perceive most things as unchanging and still.  Then we use language to label this fallacious stillness.  We recognize similarities in the stillness and create categories and definitions.  We forget all about our faulty premise and attribute a priori importance to these forms we perceive; though in fact knowing no two things are truly separate and everything’s constantly moving (a.k.a. the holomovement).”

“Bohm cautions that this does not mean the universe is a giant undifferentiated mass.  Things can be part of an undivided whole and still possess their own unique qualities.  To illustrate what he means he points to the little eddies and whirlpools that often form in a river.  At a glance such eddies appear to be separate things and possess many individual characteristics such as size, rate, and direction of rotation, et cetera.  But careful scrutiny reveals that it is impossible to determine where any given whirlpool ends and the river begins.  Thus, Bohm is not suggesting that the differences between ‘things’ is meaningless.  He merely wants us to be aware constantly that dividing various aspects of the holomovement into ‘things’ is always an abstraction, a way of making those aspects stand out in our perception by our way of thinking.  In attempts to correct this, instead of calling different aspects of the holomovement ‘things,’ he prefers to call them ‘relatively independent subtotalities.”  -Michael Talbot, “The Holographic Universe” (48-9)

For Bohm, atoms are not the “building blocks of matter” but rather just a term given to one aspect of the holomovement.  The various forms we name, words and categories we create, are all ultimately arbitrary because at the implicate level of reality, everything is one. No two atoms, two rocks, two trees, or two people are any more separate from one another than whirlpools are separate from the river.  The universe is a holographic oneness in perpetual motion, both created and navigated by consciousness.  Matter is not separated by space and time; rather, matter, space, and time are always already ever-present and one.  To illustrate this, think of a DVD.  At the explicate level of the DVD, you see a movie with people, places and events happening in space and time.  For the actors on your television screen, they experienced everything happening in “real” time in the “real” world during filming.  But for you the viewer, holding the DVD in your hand, you can see the implicate level of the movie where all the people, places, and events on it are mere projections of a single totality.  You can rewind, fast-forward, slow-mo, or freeze-frame the entire realistic three-dimensional explicate world of the DVD because you are operating from the implicate world of remote control.  The One, God, infinite consciousness, cosmic mind, or whatever you want to call it, operates at the objective, omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent level of the implicate DVD, and meanwhile us humans, animals, plants, insects, and every other subjective entity in the physical universe are method actors in the explicate movie.   Bohm himself said, “It will be ultimately misleading and indeed wrong to suppose, for example, that each human being is an independent actuality who interacts with other human beings and with nature.  Rather, all these are projections of a single totality.”

“While it may look as though we’re disconnected from one another and the rest of the world, that detachment doesn’t exist on the plane where the hologram originates … On this level of unity, there really can be no such things as ‘here’ and ‘there.’”  -Gregg Braden, “The Divine Matrix” (107)

“Matter does not exist independently from so-called empty space.  It is a part of space … Space is not empty.  It is full, a plenum as opposed to a vacuum, and is the ground for the existence of everything, including ourselves.”  -Michael Talbot, “The Holographic Universe” (51)

“David Bohm’s work into quantum physics and quantum mechanics also realized and affirmed a single ultimate reality; the true nature of the Universe.  Time will inevitably show the Universal explicate, implicate and super implicate orders of David Bohm and the holomovement, will eventually have most profound implications for humanity which all science will quite simply have to accept sooner or later, thus proving conclusively the Universe rather than being a vast and disparate multitude of separately interacting particles of matter, is in reality a magnificent unbroken completeness, a continuum, an infinite flowing movement of Energy, vibration, the holomovement.” -Adrian Cooper, “Our Ultimate Reality” (88)