August-September 2001 Discussions on Remote Viewing Part 6 by Jimmy Williams Progress in understanding our world ultimately rests on the ability to appreciate and visualize the simple. Albert Einstein believed that no matter how complicated the math, the ultimate picture of how things work was so simple and elegant that everyday people could understand. He personally started off with a simple idea then described how he saw it. A simple idea evolved in to a simple formula, E=mc2. Through intuitive skill, he developed theories that changed the world. Another great physicist, Richard Feynman, produced the first successful theory uniting the special relativity of Einstein with quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics is a marvelous theory for things that happen in a normal time frame. It isn't a formula of everything. The calculations break down as you approach the speed of light, the domain of special relativity. Special relativity is fine, but irrelevant at speeds much below the speed of light. Uniting these two theories was a great feat. Feynman would get an idea of how things should work and then represent the solution pictorially, bypassing the math. This was tremendously frustrating for colleagues whose careers were characterized by plodding through excruciatingly complex mathematics in search of answers to the big questions of physics. Physics has come a long way. We now have Superstring Theory, which is very exciting and may ultimately be the unified field theory, the “Theory of Everything” that the physicists have been searching for, at least as it applies to the four forces. Conventional thought acknowledges gravity, electromagnetism and the strong and weak nuclear forces as the four pillars of all there is. Mainstream scientists believe that these four are all that is needed to explain all that is. But wait a minute…consciousness is totally missing. There is no physical theory of consciousness. There is no physical theory that explains remote viewing. Perhaps this is because physicists feel that consciousness doesn't seem to fit in to the definition of a physical force. It has been shown that conscious influence on physical objects can be detected. Experiments using random number generators have shown this. If a consciousness field were superimposed on the other four forces, could its effects are measured using the same standards we apply to physical objects and energies, it is almost undetectable? How much does a thought weigh? How many pounds per square inch can you apply with a strong feeling? Experiments have statistically proved the effect of psychic influences. They are extremely small in physical terms, yet an idea created the computer I am typing on and strong feelings are changing the political landscape of the world as I write. Is there a physical effect? The answer is obvious. If you remove or alter a fundamental force of nature, meaning disappears. No gravity…no Earth. All gravity…no Universe. No consciousness…no meaning. No buildings, cars, watches or religions. No life. The same holds true for electromagnetism and the forces of the atomic nucleus. A magnetic field cutting through a wire induces electricity. A conscious field creatively applied to matter and energy in space-time generates form. The effects run the gamut from the massive to the etheric; from the living to the dead. Complex mental creations like music can stand on there own as an entity in the conscious field just as a building can stand on its own in concrete, stone and steel in a gravity field. The question of whether remote viewing works, has been put to bed. Utterly irrefutable scientific studies have proved the existence of psychic functioning. The importance of remote viewing is that it demonstrates action across time and space. If I can retrieve remote information simply by exercising conscious will, then I have acted on the universe. Like Feynman’s colleagues, many physicists are unable or unwilling to look at things from a fresh perspective. Many are drunk with the possibilities of Superstring theory, the depths of which they have only begun to plumb. I believe there is ample proof that consciousness is a fifth fundamental force. As remote viewers, we can take our inspiration from Einstein, Feynman and other ground breaking thinkers as we investigate the field of consciousness. Let’s begin by visualizing in simple terms some of the characteristics of this “force”. Multidimensional. Since it seems to operate in violation of space-time restrictions, it must be “unified” at greater than four dimensions. By unification, we mean that one force can be seen as an aspect or extension of another force. Einstein had to postulate “Spacetime”, a unification of space and time in order to unify the concepts of matter and energy. Field strength. When a magnetic field passes through a wire, it induces an electric current. The stronger the field, or the more rapidly it passes through the wire, the stronger the current. The inverse is also true. Electric current through a wire produces a magnetic field proportional to the current flow. There have been thousands of reports of people that “knew” when a loved one was in danger or had died. The intensity and personal interest in the event induced an extrasensory perception. The moment in the movie Star Wars when Obi-Wan “Ben” Ken obi senses a tremor in the Force when the planet explodes is a dramatic example of an incident with a large psychological impact exhibiting a high “field strength” for the purpose of remote viewing. Combining the examples above, we have a unique phenomenon that exhibits some of the qualities of a magnetic field. It has some of the characteristics of induction, like a proportional response to intensity, but is missing the familiar space-time component. Singularity. Mass bends space as in a gravitational field. It extends in all directions; at least in the three spatial directions. The ultimate expression of gravity is the “Black Hole”; a gravity well so strong that not even light can escape. Gravity distinguishes what’s at its center from the space around it. It imparts the quality of singularity and uniqueness to what would otherwise be undifferentiated cosmic goop. Gravity glues discrete particles of energy and mass into an association having a combined identity that it otherwise wouldn't have. The Earth and Moon circle each other, captured by their interacting gravitational fields. If you approach this system from far away, in route to the Moon, you couldn't help but be influenced by the Earth. If your intent and skill as a navigator wavered, you would almost certainly be sucked into Earth’s gravitational field, missing your target entirely. My esteemed colleague, Sita Seery, recently published a prime example of the remote viewing equivalent of this on the Hawaii Remote Viewer’s Guild web site. The recent World Trade Center bombing caused a massive accretion in the conscious field. To use the example above, it was as if, in the course of traveling to a Moon-sized planet, the Earth suddenly appeared. In this case the intended target was a relatively mundane validation target. An important aspect of this is that the viewing took place several hours before the actual event occurred. The field strength of the WTC event was so powerful that the session work was littered with WTC data from multiple viewers. This is a prime example of how field strength applies to RV and how conventional space-time considerations are violated in the conscious field. An event or thing that has any coherency of its own has a center of sorts. It is not a center of gravity, but a center of meaning. It is a center of importance. It has a singular quality that distinguishes it from everything else. Association. This is like that. This is with that. Association acts much like static electricity. Things which are in close proximity cling together. In this case like charges attract. It has it’s mirror opposite in the electromagnetic field where like charges repel. Things that are associated by virtue of spatial proximity, by meaning or by emotion accrete into a center of sorts, apart from that imposed by gravity. High association equals high cohesion. Low association equals nebulosity. If gravity were subject to whimsy, the cosmos would continuously morph with our changes in ideas about it. It mop. Our ideas, feelings and impulses govern our actions and are subject to the action of thought. They cause continuous changes in the conscious landscape. This defines the boundary between features of the conscious field versus energy-mass features of the gravitational field. There is overlap. The dynamics operate differently but with ghostly similarity. Discrimination. This is not like that. This is not with that. This is the complement of association. All the meaning we perceive, exists between the vacuum of space and the highly defined point created by the gravitational wells of spatial bodies. If gravity were an absolutely irresistible force, all there is would fall together in a Big Crunch. There would no longer be any meaning to the concept “Universe”. One set of associated ideas or events is unique from another set of ideas by virtue of our ability to disassociate one from another. As association and disassociation change, the topography of the conscious field changes. Perspective. Events as we conventionally perceive them are organized in meaningful ways due to their angle of incidence in space-time relative to the percipient. This is how our mind assigns causality. Consciousness as a field is superior to but coexists with spacetime. A portion of the conscious field is intimately connected with and conditioned by the four dimensions. This aspect of mind processes the world in terms of causality. This is the appropriate domain for rational, analytical thought. What is interesting about remote viewing is that it teaches the viewer to collect data from that part of the field that is not preconditioned to four-dimensional constraints. By disconnecting the normal analytical mode of thinking, we are able to retrieve data unrestricted by space and time. As Rene Warcollier states in his book Experiments in Telepathy, “In fact, telepathy almost never manifests itself to the percipient by a sense-image or a memory-image of the agent.” Which is to say, the data is not perceived with the analytical and rational framework intact as it applies to direct sensing or as it applies to memory. “It seems that memory or sense images disintegrate into their component elements; and it is from these elements, revived by the percipient, that the creative imagination reconstructs, as well it can, the perception or memory-image of the agent.” The characteristics of the conscious field, apart from the constraints of the matter-energy-gravity fields are such that “meaning” is divorced from sequential, causal references. The information is there but the framework in which it is normally understood is missing. Association is king when time and space are rendered irrelevant. Remember, at the speed of light, quantum mechanics breaks down. At lower velocities special relativity breaks down. In the conscious field space-time and causality breaks down. All are accurate pictures of how the universe works, but each is king in its own domain. Meaning. How we assemble data has to do with our unique qualities of creative intelligence. It also has to do with all the other factors I have mentioned till now: The multidimensional aspect of the conscious field, field strength, singularity, association, discrimination and perspective all play a part. When we attempt to remote view, we establish an association with a field in the matrix that has some level of identity and cohesion of its own. It is a thing or event that exists in the past or future. It has a topography governed by the physical matter, energy and consciousness that give it meaning. We approach it following a chain of associations. As remote viewers, our approach to a target is conditioned by our ability to manage the data. Each person is unique in the way they filter data through their conscious and subconscious mind. We perceive what we can. The rest is filtered out. As a conscious being approaching an event in the matrix, the way one senses and reports data and ones ability to home in on the intended subject are totally governed by our unique nature. It takes skill and practice to learn to collect data without altering the subtleties of the field with ones own ideas and memories. This environment is tenuous and subtle. Ones thoughts have field strength of their own. Thoughts can create new associative relationships as one enters the field of the target. When this happens it becomes difficult to navigate. Biases of our own creation can cause us to miss that target entirely. Memories from our prior associations can overlay and confuse what is really there. One difficulty of the topography is that there are times when personal preferences pull us toward something we naturally find more interesting. The landscape of the consciousness field is filled with subjects in close proximity to one another due to associative linkage. It is easy to lose focus and go chasing after something other than the target. If the subject being remote viewed were a cat up a tree, I would be attracted to the fire truck that had come to assist. That fire truck appeals to me; the cat Warcollier. If this were my beloved cat up the tree, I would be infused with emotion but probably War collier wouldn't notice fireman Bob. Well-disciplined remote viewers can manage the distractions and apply themselves to the target that was tasked. The remote viewing problem imposed by the World Trade Center event is one of field strength. Similarly, if you attempt to view the center of Hiroshima today, there is a fair chance that you will be sucked in to the event horizon of the atomic explosion of 1945. Field strength in the consciousness field can and often does overwhelm space-time. In conclusion, I would like to say that remote viewing could be the pry bar that opens us up to a grander perspective of our universe. If consciousness is a fundamental force of nature, many of the anomalies we see, like remote viewing and other psychic functioning, suddenly become simple in a way that anyone can understand. Maybe Einstein was right. Maybe regular people will be able to understand when we finally see the simple, beautiful truth of it all. Return to Home Page Privacy Statement Copyright © 2001, H.R.V.G. All rights reserved.