Speaker 1: So let's start with just a really fundamental question. Where
are your memories?
Speaker 2: Right? I mean where they actually stored exactly?
Speaker 1: We just assume they're in our brains, right locked away
in the neurons. But think about this for a second.
If you had some terrible accident and you lost say
half of your brain tissue, would you lose half of
your life story?
Speaker 2: That's the question, isn't it? Based on the classical view,
the standard model of neurobiology, the answer should be a
hard yes.
Speaker 1: Of course.
Speaker 2: The brain is a biological computer, a hard drive. You
delete half the drive, you lose half the data. But
the thing is the clinical evidence, and some of this
goes back, you know, almost one hundred years. It just
doesn't line up with that memory. Seems to be something
else entirely. It's non local.
Speaker 1: And that's where this gets so fascinating, because what if
the brain isn't a hard drive at all? What if
it's not a storage center but something, well, something much weirder,
like a kind of cosmic antenna, a receiver, yes, a
receiver constantly tuning into a universe where all that information,
all your memories, maybe all of consciousness itself, is already there.
Already enfolded.
Speaker 2: That is the absolute heart of the holonomic brain theory,
and that's the astonishing hypothesis we're going to unpack today.
Speaker 1: Welcome to Thrilling Threads, where we take your sources and
dive deep into what they really mean.
Speaker 2: And today's exploration is all about this radical synthesis from
two i mean absolute giants in their fields, the neuroscientists
Carl Pribram and the quantum physicist David Bohm.
Speaker 1: Their combined work creates this bridge a theory that might
just explain everything from phantom limb pain to believe it
or not precognition.
Speaker 2: We're pulling from some really challenging material here, sources like
doctor David Wollennick's work on the holographic view of reality,
plus a number of articles detailing the collaboration between Prebrim
and boem. Our mission is to really understand why these
brilliant minds felt they had to look beyond just physical
matter to explain how the mind works.
Speaker 1: So here's the roadmap for you. We're going to start
with the problem the neurological anomalies that just they shatter
that neat, tidy model of the brain.
Speaker 2: Then we'll see how Carl Probroun use the mathematics of
the hologram to solve this crisis of distributed memory.
Speaker 1: After that we take the full leap into the quantum
realm with David Boem. We're going to explore his concepts
of the implicate and explicate orders what he called the hollow.
Speaker 2: Movement, and finally we'll put it all together. We'll look
at the incredible implications this has for consciousness, for healing,
and for the nature of time itself. So get ready,
because we're starting with the hard evidence that your brain
is not what you think it is.
Speaker 1: Okay, So the standard model, this is what most of
us learned in.
Speaker 2: School, absolutely the idea of localization. It dominates neurobiology specific
functions like motor control or language or recognizing your mother's face.
They're all neatly mapped to very specific discrete parts of the.
Speaker 1: Brain like a serpent board. This part does this, that
part does that precisely.
Speaker 2: And memory, we're taught is stored as a physical change
an end gram, a change in the synaptic connections in
a specific location in the cortex, which.
Speaker 1: Makes total intuitive sense. I mean, if you damage the
speech center, you can't speak So if you damage the
spot where I don't know your memory, if third grade
is stored, that memory should be gone forever.
Speaker 2: It should be. But the evidence that memory and really
all complex functions are distributed, not localized, it's just so
persistent and so challenging to that neat model.
Speaker 1: Where does that challenge start? What's the first big crack
in the foundation?
Speaker 2: Well, one of the earliest and most dramatic pieces of
evidence comes from the Canadian neurosurgeon Wilder Penfield. His work
spanned from the nineteen twenties all the way to the seventies.
Speaker 1: Right, I've heard of this. This is the guy who
was like poking people's brains with an electrode while they
were away.
Speaker 2: That's the one. He was operating on epileptic patients and
he needed to map their brains very carefully before he
removed any tissue, so he'd use his mile electrical probe
on the surface of their temporal lobes.
Speaker 1: And what happened was just unbelievable, Right.
Speaker 2: It was when he stimulated certain spots, his patients didn't
just recall a memory. They had these hyper vivid, total
sensory flashbacks. They were reliving it. They could hear entire
conversations from years ago, smell the kitchen from their childhood home.
It was like a movie playing in their heads.
Speaker 1: So Penfield's conclusion.
Speaker 2: Was he famously concluded that everything we've ever experienced, no
matter how small, is recorded. It's all there in the brain,
just waiting for the right trigger. For him, this was
definitive proof that memories were locked too specific localized circuits
like files on a computer.
Speaker 1: And this is a huge butt, isn't it. There's a
critical footnote that always seems to get left out.
Speaker 2: Of the textbooks, a crucial one. Our sources really emphasize
this point. Penfield's findings, these vivid, localized flashbacks were never
able to be duplicated in non epileptic patients. Never never.
Speaker 1: Wow. Okay, so that changes everything. Why would it only
work on brains that were already compromised by epilepsy, Brains
that are defined by disorganized electrical activity.
Speaker 2: The million dollar question. It strongly suggests that when the
brain is functioning normally, the way it retrieves memory is
fundamentally different. It's not about finding one little spot, It's
likely something much more diffuse, maybe something wave based.
Speaker 1: So the idea of a single memory file in a
single location starts to fall apart.
Speaker 2: It does. And when you move from just stimulating the
brain to actually removing huge chunks of it, the whole
localization model just it breaks down completely. It becomes sensational.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about those extreme cases then, the ones involving
missing brain mass.
Speaker 2: One of the most compelling sets of data comes from
studies on children with this, yeah, this intractable, life threatening epilepsy.
We're looking at a nineteen ninety seven report that detailed
doctor Eileen Vining's work at Johns.
Speaker 1: Hopkins, and she was studying kids who underwent a procedure
called a hemispherrectomy, which is I mean, it's as radical
as it sounds.
Speaker 2: It is. It's the complete surgical removal of an entire
hemisphere of the brain, the left or the right gone.
Speaker 1: If we stick to the hard drive model, removing half
the physical structure, that should be catastrophic. You just lose
half your memories, half your personality, half of everything.
Speaker 2: You absolutely should but the sources confirmed that's not what happened.
The kids did not lose half their intelligence or memories.
In fact, for many of them, because the constant damaging
seizures were gone. They actually showed improvement.
Speaker 1: They got smarter with half a brain.
Speaker 2: Their intelligence scores went up, their physical coordination improved. The
remaining hemisphere displayed this incredible plasticity and just took over
the functions of the missing half.
Speaker 1: That is astounding. So you take away fifty percent of
the storage medium, but one hundred percent of the person,
their identity, their life story, it's all still there, still accessible.
Speaker 2: Which means the information must have been stored everywhere. Yeah,
throughout the whole brain, right, And this is the big lead.
Maybe it wasn't primarily stored in the physical brain structure
at all.
Speaker 1: And if that's not enough to shake your foundations, then
we have to talk about doctor John Larber.
Speaker 2: Oh Larber's work is just it's the ultimate challenge. It
was reported in a ninety eighty article in the journal
Science with the very provocative title is your brain really necessary? I?
Speaker 1: Love that? So what did he study?
Speaker 2: He was a specialist in hydrocephalus, which is commonly known
as water on the brain. He studied two hundred and
fifty three patients, and the most extreme cases were people
whose skulls were almost entirely filled with cerebrospinal.
Speaker 1: Fluids, so there was barely any brain left.
Speaker 2: In some cases, just a thin lining of brain tissue,
maybe only five percent of the normal brain mass. The
rest was just fluid.
Speaker 1: The expectation would be that these people would be I mean,
severely disabled.
Speaker 2: Right, non functional, maybe nonverbal. But Larber found nine individuals
in that extreme group who had IQs greater than one hundred,
which is.
Speaker 1: Average with five percent of a brain.
Speaker 2: And get this, two of them had IQs over one
hundred and twenty six. That puts them in the superior
intelligence category. One was a mathematics honor student.
Speaker 1: How is that physically possible? I mean, how can you function,
let alone brilliantly, with ninety five percent of your brain
just gone?
Speaker 2: The localization model has absolutely no answer.
Speaker 1: For that, none at all. It completely fails. The only
logical conclusion you can draw is that the mind or
the memory or intelligence must be encoded by some property
that is independent of physical mass and location.
Speaker 2: Which brings us to what might be the most extreme
and frankly kind of disturbing experiments in this whole story,
the ones done by Paul Peach. Yeah, Peach's story is
a wild one. He was an eurobiologist who actually set
out to disprove the non local theory. He was a
firm believer in the classical model and was determined to
find the spot where memories were stored.
Speaker 1: So what did he do.
Speaker 2: He performed over seven hundred operations on salamanders. They are
perfect subjects because of their amazing ability to regenerate nerve tissues.
Speaker 1: Oh okay, so he'd train them to do something exactly.
Speaker 2: He'd trained them to perform specific complex feeding behaviors, and
then he would just radically distort their brains. I mean
he tried everything. He sliced the brain into pieces, he
flipped the hemispheres front to back, he shuffled the lay around.
Speaker 1: That sounds brutal.
Speaker 2: It gets worse. His most extreme experiment, and this sounds
like something out of a horror movie. He would mince
the brain tissue.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, he would what He would mince.
Speaker 2: It, turn it into a complete slurry, a scramble of tissue,
and then just put it back into the cranial cavity
and let the animal heel.
Speaker 1: He made a brain smoothie. And what happened? I mean
that has to destroy everything, right, every connection and every pathway.
Speaker 2: It should have it should have resulted in total permanent
cognitive scrambling. But the sources are clear. As the salamander's recovered,
sometimes within just hours, they regained their complex, trained feeding behaviors. Perfectly,
You're kidding, not at all. The memory returned. The information
was still there, even though the physical structure it was
supposedly stored in had been completely obliterated.
Speaker 1: That's that's unbelievable. So the information was not dependent on
the specific arrangement of the neurons exactly.
Speaker 2: And Peach, after years of trying and failing to find
the memory spot, finally gave up and concluded the mind
wasn't tied to the physical structure. He said, it had
to exist as codes of wave phase, a property that
survives even when you shuffle the medium.
Speaker 1: It's in codes of wave phase that sounds holographic.
Speaker 2: It's the perfect bridge that insight that the brain is
dealing in wave properties and that information is distributed everywhere.
That's what leads us directly to Carl Pribram and the
holoonomic brain theory. The old model is broken. We need
a new one.
Speaker 1: So Carl Prebram, he saw all this conflicting evidence from
his work with Penfield, from Lashley's rat maze experiments, from
these extreme clinical cases, and he knew the old model
was in crisis.
Speaker 2: He did. He understood that this bizarre phenomenon of distributed
function needed a new explanation, and he realized that all
these strange properties, they were perfectly explained by the physics
of a hologram.
Speaker 1: Okay, So most of us when we hear hologram, we
think of that little dove on a credit card, or
you know, Princess Leah in Star Wars, a fancy three
D picture.
Speaker 2: Right, But the physics behind it is what's so revolutionary.
We need to get into the mechanics of how it's made,
because that's the key. Let's do it, Okay, So to
create a hologram, you take a single laser beam and
you split it in two. The first beam is called
a reference beam. The second beam is bounced off the
object you want to record. Let's use the classic example
an apple.
Speaker 1: So that second beam now carries the information of the
apple exactly.
Speaker 2: The light waves have been altered by reflecting off the
apple surface. Then that second beam colligns with the first beam,
the clean reference beam, and where they meet. You place
a piece of photographic.
Speaker 1: Film, and what gets recorded on the film isn't a
picture of an apple.
Speaker 2: Not at all. It's a swirl. It's a complex, seemingly
random pattern of light and dark ripples. It's called an
interference pattern. Yeah, and to the naked eye it looks
like nothing. But mathematically, that blur contains the absolute totality
of the apple's three dimensional information.
Speaker 1: And here is the part that solved Prebrim's crisis. This
is the core holographic property.
Speaker 2: This is it. If you take that piece of hologram
graphic film and you cut it into pieces, even a
tiny fragment, that tiny fragment still contains all the information
needed to reconstruct the entire three dimensional image of the apple.
Speaker 1: The hole is in the park.
Speaker 2: The hole is in every part. Now, the movies you
project from a smaller piece will be fuzzier, less detailed,
but it will always be the whole apple.
Speaker 1: And that is the perfect explanation for the salamander slurry,
for the hemispherrectomies. If every part of the brain contains
the whole memory, you can scramble it. You can remove
huge chunks of it, and the life story the learned behavior.
It all remains accessible, a little fuzzier maybe, but it's
still there.
Speaker 2: It also solves another massive problem, storage capacity. The mathematician
John von Neuman did a calculation. He figured the human
brain stores something on the order of two point eight
times ten to the twentieth bits of information in a.
Speaker 1: Lifetime, which is a number so big it's basically meaningless.
A twenty eight with nineteen zeros after it.
Speaker 2: It's astronomical, and it dwarfs the capacity of any model
based on storing one bit of information in one synapse.
You need a mechanism for incredibly dense information storage, and
holography provides that you can store vast amounts of data
in a very small space because the interference patterns can
be recorded down to the wavelength of the light itself.
Speaker 1: So if the brain is a hologram, what's creating the
interference patterns, what's.
Speaker 2: The laser Prebrim's idea was that the brain is so
densely packed with neurons all constantly firing these little electrical pulses.
These pulses create ripples, which are a wavelike phenomenon, and
in that confined space, these waves are constantly crisscrossing, interfering
with each.
Speaker 1: Other, creating a constant, dynamic interference pattern.
Speaker 2: A neural hologram. So the fundamental language of the brain
isn't just a simple on off chemical signal between two neurons.
It's the language of wave interference.
Speaker 1: And if that's true, there must be a mathematical basis
for it.
Speaker 2: There is, and Prebrim reasoned that if the brain is
operating like this, it must be using a specific kind
of math Fouria mathematics.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's break that down. Transform.
Speaker 2: What is it In simple terms, it's a mathematical tool.
It's a way to take any complex pattern, a sound
wave of a picture, anything, and translate it into a
language of simple constituent waveforms, frequencies. And crucially, it lets
you reverse the process. You can take the frequency information
and turn it back into the original pattern.
Speaker 1: It's the math that was literally used to invent the hologram.
Speaker 2: Precisely, and this isn't just a hypothesis. This was validated
in the lab. Researchers like the Devil Laws proved that
the cells in the visual cortex, they don't respond to
the patterns we see, like a sharp line or a
specific shape.
Speaker 1: They don't what do they respond to?
Speaker 2: They respond to the fourty eight translations of those patterns,
the underlying frequencies. The brain is processing the world in
the frequency domain first and foremost.
Speaker 1: So it's constantly taking the reality we see the object
and converting it into this unfolded frequency data, this interference pattern,
and then our conscious perception is the brain translating it
back into what looks like a three D world out there.
Speaker 2: Exactly, it's a virtual image, which is why the classic
example of the phantom limb is so powerful.
Speaker 1: Right, you stub your toe, the pain isn't actually in
your toe, No.
Speaker 2: It's a neurophysiological process in your brain. Your brain creates
a neural hologram of your foot and then assigns the
pain to that specific location on the internal map.
Speaker 1: So when an amputee feels agonizing pain in a limb
that is physically gone, it's because the neural hologram, the
frequency blueprint of that limb is still active in the brain.
Speaker 2: The brain literally cannot distinguish between the real object and
the remembered image of that object. The hologram is a
reality as far as the brain is concerned.
Speaker 1: When prebrims showed this wasn't just for vision or memory.
It applies to movement too.
Speaker 2: Yes, he cited the work of Nikolai Bernstein from the
nineteen thirties. Bernstein recorded dancers movements by putting white dots
on their joints, and he showed that these incredibly complex
fluid movements could be broken down and predicted using fourio
wave analysis.
Speaker 1: So even the commands to move of our bodies are
being sent out in a frequency language.
Speaker 2: It seems to be the universal operating system. The brain thinks, sees, remembers,
and moves in the frequency domain.
Speaker 1: So Prebrim has this incredible model the brain is a
holographic decoder. But that just leads to an even bigger,
more profound question, doesn't it.
Speaker 2: It's the ultimate question. If the reality inside our heads
is a hologram, a decoded frequency pattern, then what is
it a hologram of? Is the objective reality out there
also just a frequency pattern?
Speaker 1: Is it all just maya, as the mystics would say,
an illusion.
Speaker 2: That's the question that forced Prebrim to look beyond neuroscience
and into the deepest, weirdest parts of quantum physics, and
that's what led him to David Bohm.
Speaker 1: Right, so if Prebrim built the receiver, David Boehm is
the one who described the broadcast.
Speaker 2: That's a perfect way to put it. Boehm was a
brilliant physicist, a protege of Einstein's, and he was looking
at the same weird quantum paradoxes that were baffling everyone else.
Speaker 1: He wasn't satisfied with the standard answers, was he.
Speaker 2: Not at all? Standard quantum theory was a huge success
in terms of making predictions, but Boem felt it was
a philosophical failure. It didn't give a clear coherent picture
of what the world was actually made of.
Speaker 1: He was focused on the whole wave particle duality thing, right,
the basic stuff of the universe. Quanta sometimes behave like
particles and sometimes like waves.
Speaker 2: And the really weird part which experiments like the double
slid experiment seemed to show is that they only collapse
into definite particles when we are looking at them. When
we're not observing them, they exist as spread out waves
of probability.
Speaker 1: This is where my brain starts to hurt y.
Speaker 2: That's where everyone's brain starts to hurt And it led
Bohm to propose this revolutionary news structure for reality, which
he divided into two levels.
Speaker 1: Okay, what are they.
Speaker 2: First, there's the explicate order, the unfolded order. This is
our world, the tangible reality of coffee cups, trees, and
our own bodies. Boem saw this world as transient, secondary,
almost like a temporary projection.
Speaker 1: The holographic image exactly.
Speaker 2: And then underneath it all there's the implicate order, the
unfolded order. He called this the ground of existence. This
is the deeper primary reality, where everything, all matter, all information,
across all of space and time is enfolded together in
a state of unbroken wholeness.
Speaker 1: So the world we see the explicate order is just
the result of things constantly unfolding out of this deeper
reality and then unfolding back into it.
Speaker 2: A constant flux, a dynamic process. And once you accept
that the universe is organized this way like a hologram
where the hole is in every part, the normal rules
of location just they break down.
Speaker 3: This is non locality, Yes, the idea that everything is
instantaneously and fundamentally interconnected, no matter how far apart things
appear to be in our explicate.
Speaker 1: Three D world, Boom actually preferred a different term. Didn't
he something that captured the dynamic nature of it?
Speaker 2: He did. He called it the hollow movement. He wanted
to stress that this deeper reality is an a static thing.
It's a continuous, active flow, constantly unfolding into the world
we see and then folding back into wholeness.
Speaker 1: That is a massive concept to try and wrap your
head around. Did he have any analogies to help visualize it.
Speaker 2: He had two fantastic ones that are crucial for getting
a feel for this hidden structure. The first is the
analogy of the fish in the aquarium. Imagine you have
a fish swimming in a tank, but you're not looking
at the tank directly. You're looking at two TV screens
fed by two separate cameras. One camera is pointed at
the front of the tank and one is pointed at
the side.
Speaker 1: So on the screens I see two different fish. They
seem like separate things they do.
Speaker 2: They're two separate two D images, But as you watch them,
you notice something strange. Every time one fish moves, the
other one moves instantly and in a perfectly correlated way.
You eventually realize they aren't two separate entities. Communicating with
each other.
Speaker 1: They're two different perspectives, two unfolded projections of one single
underlying reality, the one real fish in the.
Speaker 2: Tank that is his explanation for quantum entanglement article, seem
to influence each other instantly across vast distances. They're not
sending signals faster than light. They're just two fish images,
two projections of one indivisible, non local reality. They were
never separate to begin with.
Speaker 1: Okay, that makes it much clearer. They're two manifestations of
the same thing. What's the second analogy, the one about enfolding.
Speaker 2: This one is even more powerful. I think. Imagine a
large glass cylinder filled with glycerin, a very thick, clear,
viscous liquid, and you place a single drop of dark
ink into.
Speaker 1: It, right, So you have a discrete, localized ink.
Speaker 2: Drop for now. But the cylinder has a handle you
can turn, which slowly stirs the glycerin. As you turn
the handle, the inkdrop gets stretched out, diffused. It spreads
throughout the glycerin until it seems to disappear completely. It
becomes disordered, random. The information looks.
Speaker 1: Like it's been lost, It's been enfolded into the glycery exactly.
Speaker 2: But here's the magic. If you then slowly and carefully
turn the handle back in the opposite direction, the faint
races of ink begin to draw back together, They collapse
on themselves and miraculously reform perfectly into the original single droplet.
Speaker 1: Wow. So even when it looked like chaos, the order
was still there. It was just hidden and folded throughout
the whole system.
Speaker 2: The total content of the inkrop was preserved in the
implicate order of the Glycerin our physical reality, Bom argued,
is like that reconstituted droplet, a temporary unfolding from a
much deeper infolded order.
Speaker 1: And when you put that together with Prebram's holographic brain,
the picture becomes just mind blowing.
Speaker 2: It's the grand synthesis. Pribrim's brain isn't creating reality. It's
a decoder interpreting the frequencies from Bohm's hollow movement. The
brain mathematically constructs the objective reality we experience. By interpreting
these frequencies. There are projections unfoldings from a deeper holographic
dimension that exists beyond our normal understanding of space and time.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's really impact that the Grand synthesis, the brain
is a foury A D Cooder. The universe is a
sea of unfolded holographic information, the implicate.
Speaker 2: Order, right, and the theory. The big leap is that
consciousness itself isn't generated by the squishy matter of the brain.
Consciousness is primary. It exists perhaps universally, within that implicate order.
Speaker 1: So what's the brain's job then, If it's not creating consciousness,
what is it doing?
Speaker 2: Its role shifts completely. It's no longer the factory or
the storage unit. It's a filter, it's a receiver. It's
a highly sophisticated antenna. Its job is to tune into
a decode a very very tiny fraction of all that
pre existing information in the quantum.
Speaker 1: Field, and in doing so it transforms that vast infinite
ocean of frequency into the limited tangible space time world
we perceive the explicate order.
Speaker 2: Yes, which is a massive conceptual jump. But the sources
do try to offer some mechanics for how this decoding
might work, how the brain interfaces with this quantum field.
Speaker 1: Right, what does that signal even look like?
Speaker 2: Well, to Boeme's model, in our explicate domain information manifests
these these electromagnetic shells. He called isospheres.
Speaker 1: Isispheres, and these exist at the absolute smallest possible scale
of reality, don't.
Speaker 2: They the absolute smallest. They're separated by a measurement of
one plank length that's ten to the minus thirty five meters.
It's a scale so small it's almost impossible to comprehend.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the analogy I read was, if you blew up
a single atom to be the size of the known universe,
a plank length would be about the height of a
tree on Earth.
Speaker 2: It's the fundamental pixel of reality, the boundary where our
physics breaks down. The theory says, our decoding mechanism is
operating at this incredibly deep quantum level. These isis spheres
are what resonate with the non local holiflex, the flow
of information from the implicate.
Speaker 1: Order, So our consciousness, the world we experience is basically
a function of the brain's bandwidth. It's the specific tiny
range of frequencies we are able to tune into. The
world is just the channel we're watching.
Speaker 2: And this idea lines up perfectly with what's called the
fractal holographic model, the idea that our individual consciousness is
an intrinsic, fractal reflection of the entire universe. The architecture
of our mind mirrors the architecture.
Speaker 1: Of the cosmos as above, so below, it's the.
Speaker 2: Physical basis for that perennial mystical insight. The idea of
unity isn't just a spiritual platitude, it's a description of
the quantum field.
Speaker 1: So to sum it up, the brain is not a
factory creating consciousness. It's a radio receiving it from a
universal tuantum broadcast.
Speaker 2: And if that's true, if our perceived reality is an
internally constructed holographic projection, then all the limits we assume
about mind over matter just start to crumble.
Speaker 1: This is where things get really wild, because if the
brain is decoding frequencies and it can't always tell the
difference between a real external signal and an internally generated one,
this provides a mechanism for what we could call reality sculpting.
Speaker 2: The most powerful and scientically accepted example of this is
the Placebo effect. This isn't some minor medical curiosity. It's
hard empirical proof that your belief your internal hologram, can
fundamentally change your physical biology.
Speaker 1: And the sources detail the story of mister Wright, which
is just it's tragic but so powerful it is.
Speaker 2: This is in the nineteen fifties, just to write, had
terminal lymphosarcoma. He was covered in massive tumors, his chest
was filling with fluid daily. He was on his.
Speaker 1: Deathbed, but he heard about a new wonder drug called creviosin.
Speaker 2: And he begged his doctor for it. He had absolute
faith that this drug would save him. The doctor gave
him an injection and within days his tumors had melted
a half their size. The fluid in his chest vanished.
He was out of his hospital bed, joking with the nurses.
His recovery was miraculous, cured until until he read the news.
The American Medical Association published a definitive report stating that
Krebozen was a worthless, ineffective.
Speaker 1: Sham, and his belief was shattered completely.
Speaker 2: His cancer immediately came roaring back, and he died two
days later. The neural hologram of I am being cured
was powerful enough to reverse a terminal physical illness, and
the hologram of this is worthless was instantly fatal.
Speaker 1: That's just stunning proof the mind projected a reality of
healing and the body, which is also a holographic projection.
Speaker 2: It just it obeyed, and you see this in the
broader statistics. Double blind studies show that placebos are often
fifty to sixty percent as effective as powerful drugs like
aspirin or even morphine.
Speaker 1: There's also the story about the cancer drug cisplatinum.
Speaker 2: Right when it was first introduced, it was hailed as
a wonder drug and its effectiveness rate was around seventy
five percent. But as that initial hype that collective belief
faded over time, its effectiveness dropped to around twenty five
or thirty percent. The collective placebo effect was responsible for
more than half its power.
Speaker 1: The shared holographic belief structure was literally changing how the
drug interacted with people's bodies.
Speaker 2: It seems so, and this ability of the mind to
project a hologram onto the body leads us to one
of the most astonishing clinical misas to associative identity disorder
or DD.
Speaker 1: Right, the sources use the older term MPD multiple personality disorder,
and we know that each sub personality or alter has
different memories, ages, and so on.
Speaker 2: But it's the physical changes that defy any classical explanation.
The sources detail how each sub personality can exhibit totally
different brainwave patterns, different blood flow, even different muscle tone.
Speaker 1: And it gets even stranger.
Speaker 2: Right much stranger. You find cases where one personality is
violently allergic to say, orange juice and will break out
in hives, but another personality in the Xaccain body can
drink it without any reaction at all.
Speaker 1: So the body's physical programming is being completely rewritten based
on which person is in control.
Speaker 2: There are accounts of visual acuity changing, so different personalities
need different eyeglass prescriptions. Even eye color has been reported
to shift. Menstrual cycles can vary.
Speaker 1: If the body were just a fixed material thing, none
of that should be possible.
Speaker 2: It shouldn't. The question the holographic theory apps is this
is the brain using holographic principles to store and access
completely different physiological blueprints for the same body. It's like
the mind is swapping out the reality file for the
physical structure, projecting dozens of different physiologically distinct people into
one physical container.
Speaker 1: So if the mind can shift reality that dramatically inside
the body, what about outside the body? This is where
we get into psychokinesis PK mind over matter.
Speaker 2: If reality is fundamentally appliable frequency pattern, then conscious intent
should be able to influence it. And there's some compelling
lab data here. The work at the Princeton Engineering Anomalies
Research Lab, the per Lab.
Speaker 1: Right John and Dunn. They had volunteers try to influence
the output of random event generators.
Speaker 2: These are machines that use quantum processes to produce genuinely
random fifty to fifty outcomes like a perfect coin flip,
and over millions of trials, volunteers were able to cause
small but statistically significant shifts away from chance. They could
nudge the randomness with their minds.
Speaker 1: And it wasn't just on a microscopic level.
Speaker 2: No, they also used a macroscopic machine, a kind of
giant pinball device with thousands of marbles, and people could
influence where the marbles fell, again just by intention. The
effects were tiny, but they were consistent and repeatable.
Speaker 1: It's evidence that consciousness can interact directly with the wave
patterns of matter, nudging the probability field.
Speaker 2: But then you have the accounts that go way beyond
the lab, the supernormal feats that seem to just completely
suspend the known laws of physics.
Speaker 1: Like the Dutch psychic Mirran Dojo.
Speaker 2: A truly mind boggling case in nineteen forty seven in Zurich,
in front of doctors and scientists, Dodgo was impaled with
a fencing foil a rape yer. It went straight through
his body through vital organs. No bleeding, no pain, no
internal damage. He even walked around one upstairs for an
X ray with the foil still inside him. Doctors verified it.
Speaker 1: How is that even?
Speaker 2: I mean, how were the Hawaii Kahunas who are documented
walking on thirteen hundred degree lava flows, or people handling
red hot coals. It suggests that the laws of physics,
the solidity of matter the effects of heat are maybe
not absolute laws, but deeply ingrained collective habits in the
hollow movement, habits that can be temporarily suspended by an
act of extreme conscious focus.
Speaker 1: You're essentially changing the informational frequency of reality itself.
Speaker 2: This capacity to project mental images onto matter also provides
a potential explanation for things like.
Speaker 1: Stigmata, the spontaneous appearance of crucifixion wounds on people like
Padre Pio or Saint Francis the CCI exactly.
Speaker 2: One researcher described it as the mind projecting images outside
itself and impressing them in the soft clay of the
body holographic. The intense belief, the neural hologram of the
wounds becomes so powerful that it manifests physically.
Speaker 1: So the ultimate takeaway here is something the physicist William
Tiller said. He compared the universe to the holodeck from
Star Trek.
Speaker 2: It's a great analogy. Tiller said, the universe is a
kind of holodeck, one created by the integration of all
living consciousness, and that we have the ability to shift
the laws so that we're also creating the physics as
we go along. If consciousness is the primary creative agent,
the boundaries of reality are way more flexible than we think.
Speaker 1: And if that's true for space and matter, it must
also be true for time.
Speaker 2: It has to be if the holonomic theory is correct,
our whole concept of linear time needs a complete overhaul.
Boem argued that the past doesn't just cease to exist.
He said, it simply returns to the cosmic storehouse of
the implicate order. It's still there, active and accessible.
Speaker 1: So if the past is still there and folded in
the cosmic hologram. A tuned consciousness should be able to
access it, which.
Speaker 2: Is what we see in the evidence for retrocognition. Psychic
glimpses into.
Speaker 1: The past, like the story of Stuff on Us a
Wiki a fascinating case.
Speaker 2: He could take an artifact, a piece of flint, a
shard of pottery, and by holding it he could psychometrize it.
He would see a three dimensional movie of the past.
He could accurately just the age, the culture, the exact
location that came from, often before archaeologist had even confirmed
the data.
Speaker 1: So he was tuning into the information field associated with
that object.
Speaker 2: It seems so he was accessing a record that's preserved
whole in the implicate order. The past hasn't gone, it's
just in a different frequency band.
Speaker 1: Okay, the past is accessible, that's one thing. But what
about the future. That's even more disorienting.
Speaker 2: But the body of evidence for precognition for seeing the
future is enormous. Much of it comes from the formal
remote viewing research done at the Stanford Research Institute or SRI.
Speaker 1: This is where they'd have a subject try to describe
a location someone was going to visit, but before the
location was even chosen exactly.
Speaker 2: The most famous case is Hellhamid. She was in the
lab and she was asked to describe the target that
the experimenter, how put off, would visit thirty minutes from now,
and the target hadn't been randomly selected yet.
Speaker 1: And what did she see?
Speaker 2: She drew and described a squeaking black iron triangle. After
she logged your description, put off target was randomly chosen
from a pool. He drove to the address and found
himself at a deserted playground, And in the playground was
a black iron swing set a perfect triangle shape that
squeaked rhythmically in the wind.
Speaker 1: She saw an object at a location that hadn't even
been determined yet. That that shouldn't be possible.
Speaker 2: According to our linear model of time. No, but in
three hundred and thirty four similar trials at the Peer Lab,
subjects achieved sixty two percent accuracy. It strongly suggests the future,
or at least probable futures, are already unfolded in the
implicate order, available to be tuned into.
Speaker 1: So if we can tune into past and future time,
can we move through space without our bodies? This gets
us to the out of body experience.
Speaker 2: The OBE right, and from a holographic perspective, consciousness is
non local, it's nonware, So the feeling of traveling during
an OBE might just be an illusion. It's really about
shifting the point of decoding within the universal hologram.
Speaker 1: And there's some incredible clinical evidence for this to show
it's not just a hallucination. The story of Maria's tennis shoe.
Speaker 2: I've an amazing account. Maria was a coronary patient who
had a cardiac arrest. While she was clinically dead, she
had an OBE.
Speaker 1: And she floated out of her body.
Speaker 2: She described floating out of her room and seeing a
single tennis shoe on a third floor window ledge of
the hospital, a place she could have never seen from
her room. She described it in minute detail, a worn
hole over the little toe, a shoelace tucked under the heel, and.
Speaker 1: A social worker, Kimberly Clark, actually went and found it.
Speaker 2: She climbed out onto the ledge and found the shoe,
and every single detail Maria had described was exactly correct.
Speaker 1: So Maria's consciousness, unbound from her physical body, accessed verifiable
physical information from a distance.
Speaker 2: Its powerful evidence that consciousness is not contained within the skull,
and this brings us to the final piece, the near
death experience or NDE.
Speaker 1: Which researchers like doctor Kenneth Ring called a journey into
the frequency aspects of reality.
Speaker 2: People who have NDEs often report accessing a state of
total knowledge. They feel like they suddenly understand everything about
the universe, and they say this information doesn't arrive in
a line one fact after another. It arrives all at once,
in non sequential chunks holographic characteristic.
Speaker 1: The information is everywhere.
Speaker 2: At once, and the NDE realm itself seems to be holographic.
It's described as unejective. It molds itself into shapes based
on the experiencers beliefs. Some see a tunnel, some see
a bridge, some see religious figures. The underlying reality might
be the same field of frequency, but the brain translates
it into culturally familiar holographic images.
Speaker 1: So whether it's seeing the past, glimpsing the future, moving
matter with your mind, or traveling outside the body, all
these phenomena, which are anomalies in the standard model, become
perfectly consistent if the brain is a decoder for a
universal holographic field. So we started with that question where
are your memories? And the synthesis of pre Bremen Bohm
leads to this absolutely radical conclusion. The brain is not
a storage facility. It is a lens, a biological machine
that mathematically constructs our reality by decoding a symphony of
frequencies from the hollow movement, a dimension where all time
and all information are unfolded forever.
Speaker 2: And that forces a total philosophical shift away from materialism.
It's summed up perfectly by the psychologist Keith Floyd, who said,
it may not be the brain that produces consciousness, but
rather consciousness that creates the appearance of the brain, matter, space, time,
and everything else we are pleased to interpret as the
physical universe.
Speaker 1: Wow, if our memories, our bodies, even the laws of
physics are just pliable, frequency based constructs, then we are
living in a universe that is far more participatory, far
more interconnected than we ever imagine, which.
Speaker 2: Leads us with a really hard question, the one you
have to just sit with for a while. What's it
if your life, your memories, your thoughts aren't actually sealed
inside your skull, but are distributed non locally across the
entire cosmos. Yeah, then every time you think a thought,
are you really generating something new and personal or are
you just reaching out and resonating with a piece of
universal knowledge that is already there is.
Speaker 1: The entire history of the universe, as accessible as that
name that's on the tip of your tongue.
Speaker 2: That's the question.
Speaker 1: Does this radical perspective change how you view your own mind,
your identity, and your place in the universe. Let us
know what you think. Join the conversation and tell us
your stand on the holonomic brain theory. We'll be checking
the threads