It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What is Astral Travel

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


No ONE has to PROVE IT to you. The main reason is they only need to prove it to themselves to know it as real. If you want proof, you have the capability to prove it to yourself. If you can not rely on yourself and must always have other do things for you I do feel sorry for the state in which you operate. Hopefully you will become aware enough to not deny everything you see and hear and let ignorance prevail.

Good Luck proving it to yourself, that is all you have to do! - but it seems you have already proven to yourself that it isn't real. That is all that matters, if you believe it isn't real, it isn't and never will be for you.




posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 



Thank you for your information. He is but merely trying to derail this thread with no basis in reality.

It is very interesting the implications quantum physics may have on the connection our consciousness may carry outside the physical body.

I will definitely have to study this more to find if there are any personal experiences I can relate to the new information out there.

thank you again.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 



Have you read a single book about the subject?


I prefer to go straight to the research papers myself, but hey... if you like books good for you!


They are actually very recent but very scientific works, such as "The Quantum Brain" which was written by an actual physicist, psychiatrist and psychoanalyst.


In which there is no actual evidence *for* a quantum mind at all. A quantum system would decohere to quick to be useful and there currently exists no mechanism showing how a non quantum system could protect against that decoherence.


For the layman, the "nonlocal correlation" is the connection that makes the 2 separated particles (many miles/kilometers apart from each other in separate laboratories) change state at exactly the same time, once one of them is reversed. Some previously-held theorems in physics (such as Einstein's relativity, which states nothing can travel faster than light) are preserved on technical grounds, but Einstein even called it a "spooky action at a distance" because of its non-local (ie 10,000 times the speed of light, as of the 2008 experiment mentioned above) properties.


Oh wow, you really like reading only what you want to see huh? The mechanism involved is unknown nor is anything actually moving faster than the speed of light itself. No information between the two entangled pairs moves between the two entangled pairs.


Matter is energy. A very dense form of energy. Light is also a form of energy, though a photon must have hardly any mass to it whatsoever.


Man, you almost got it... so damn close. keep trying kiddo.


Dr. William Tiller


Psychoenergetic Science ... please, you also believe in a geocentric hollow flat Earth too?



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by esteay812
 


Wrong, without the human brain consciousness can not exist. Ok people, we are *physical* beings. Alright, let's get off this primitive spiritualism garbage that our ancestors concocted before we discovered what reality is and is not. There is no heaven, no hell and no rain gods anymore.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
In which there is no actual evidence *for* a quantum mind at all.


And you know because you've read the book too?


A quantum system would decohere to quick to be useful and there currently exists no mechanism showing how a non quantum system could protect against that decoherence.


Once again, you are demonstrating your lack of understanding and misconceptions. Quantum effects are known to be able to have a direct effect upon biasing the tiny environmental signals coming into individual neurons, that "bias" them, if you are familiar with the term from electrical engineering. Neurons are biased by environmental EM fields in how they determine which neuron serves as the momentary path-of-least-resistance to the next neuron in the chain, and this is well-known and well-studied. What isn't as well-known and well-studied are the how's and why's these tiny EM fields fluctuate so much, but it's known that self-reference or recursion is actually happening within each neuron, as it links back to itself a number of times, and this potentially infinite open-loop is always unpredictable and becomes susceptible to influence from the surrounding EM field.

Ah, I'm trying to find someone who can explain it better than I can.

Here's a response to a question from physicsforums.com:


There are really two questions here.

1. Is the behavior of single neurons ever affected by quantum mechanics?

2. Is the behavior of a larger nervous system affected by quantum mechanics?

---

To the first question the answer is certainly yes. Membrane potential is constantly fluctuating due to random openings and closing of ion channels and the like. Mini synaptic events also occur stochastically probably due to quantum fluctuations.

As for the second question. This seems to be untrue. It is likely that just as with any other macroscopic system the basic component parts may feel quantum effects but the assembly as a whole behaves classically.


www.physicsforums.com...

Maybe that is a better explanation. There are multiple levels going on at the same time here. That much should be OBVIOUS, because your brain definitely operates on the same quantum field that all other matter in the universe does! The question is whether your brain is sensitive to information on that level, and the individual neurons certainly can be. So if individual neurons are altered in a sequence by quantum functions, then just that possibility alone opens up huge potential.


Oh wow, you really like reading only what you want to see huh? The mechanism involved is unknown nor is anything actually moving faster than the speed of light itself.


Wow. First you say what's going on is unknown, then you say nothing is moving faster than the speed of light. Yes, something is. Did you not see the measurement of the lower bounds of this phenomena being 10,000 times the speed of light? Do you think they are measuring "nothing"?

Someone is reading only what they want to see, but it isn't me...


No information between the two entangled pairs moves between the two entangled pairs.


No classical information, which comes with its own rules and definitions. Which I am not particularly interested in, no more than I am Newtonian mechanics when it comes to quantum physics, which is modern.



Matter is energy. A very dense form of energy. Light is also a form of energy, though a photon must have hardly any mass to it whatsoever.


Man, you almost got it... so damn close. keep trying kiddo.


Photon's mass is assumed zero.


You have to understand what the technical stuff really means before you can see past it to the reality of the mystery they are attempting to label. There is a difference between the word "light," and this stuff that is beaming into your eyeballs this very instant.




Dr. William Tiller


Psychoenergetic Science ... please, you also believe in a geocentric hollow flat Earth too?


lmao, not even in the same league. Did you miss "MIT," "tenured"? What do you think other professionals think of the man? Why don't you look that up, actually?

You are getting desperate now aren't you?

All you have to do is admit we may be onto something. And you might even tell us that you'll do some personal investigation into it yourself! Are you too afraid to do that?



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
Wrong, without the human brain consciousness can not exist.


So then animals, bugs, plants can't be conscious?



Ok people, we are *physical* beings. Alright, let's get off this primitive spiritualism garbage that our ancestors concocted before we discovered what reality is and is not. There is no heaven, no hell and no rain gods anymore


What you perceive to be science isn't a god, either. What you really revere is a spiritual pessimism and sarcastic outlook on life. If you so much as picked up Carl Jung's "Man and His Symbols" I bet it would change the way you looked at some things.



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 



I feel sorry for you!! Wrong? I think not. Without the electrical energy that passes through our bodies every moment that we exist there would be no possibility for existence.


Electrical current is a frequency and we exist within it. This frequency was around long before any physical body. It is what gives the power of physical creation and when we die we go back to that.

I assume you think that physical being came before anything else?

I bet you even know which came first between the chicken and the egg, right.

I hope you can get outside of your shortsighted mind and open your brain to what it is capable of, but you are probably so dedicated and locked into you meaterial existence you think you body is what makes you - since oyu have stated that already. LOL

Good Luck



posted on Oct, 16 2009 @ 07:48 PM
link   
Spiritual garbage concocted by our ancestors?

I love the fact that because people were alive before our modern times automatically makes them less intelligent! LOL. How do you know that what you believe isn't wrong and the spiritual nonsense they concocted doesn't have more ties with deep personal existence than believing you are but flesh.

What drove the need for a physical body? What drove the need for life at all? It didn't just happen because it could, there was a need for it.

The need came from somewhere and that need is what drove life to create a vessel with a brain.

It wasn't the other way around!

No, bodies weren't made lifeless on a production line and then charged up with life. Life charged the need for a physical body and a way to experience the universe through the physical form.

Life was here, on Earth and in the Universe, before a physical body of any kind was on Earth.



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by esteay812
 


Tool, electrical energy is propagated by an electron which is a particle... FFS people, learn what energy is. It's not a separate entity from matter, the two are the same thing. It's not like this damn mysterious 'thing' that we can all die and go live in. We get our electrical energy from intake of food, you die you stop eating. Buh bye energy, buh bye consciousness. Damn, and that's only less than *half* of what keeps the brain and body ticking.

@bsbray11

True, science isn't god, but neither is the universe some complicated magical mysterious weird place like you kind of whack jobs like to think it is. BTW, QM isn't as mysterious as you think, nor is there a faster than the speed of light communication going on and the theory itself doesn't even allow for it but tools like you don't bother learning enough about what the theory is actually saying. Read it again or find a decent description on what is going on.



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
Tool, electrical energy is propagated by an electron which is a particle... FFS people, learn what energy is. It's not a separate entity from matter, the two are the same thing. It's not like this damn mysterious 'thing' that we can all die and go live in.


Your problem is that you are not being sensitive to the possibility (which is actually now backed by scientific evidence, ie Dr. Tiller's work) that there are additional forms of energy that modern science has yet to measure and quantify. The only argument one could possibly have against science that has not been fleshed out yet, is arrogance.



True, science isn't god, but neither is the universe some complicated magical mysterious weird place like you kind of whack jobs like to think it is.


I really doubt you understood half of what I posted, still above for anyone to read. So you resort to calling me names. I will be waiting for a response to what I posted that does not rely on ad hom.



BTW, QM isn't as mysterious as you think, nor is there a faster than the speed of light communication going on and the theory itself doesn't even allow for it but tools like you don't bother learning enough about what the theory is actually saying.


Sorry, I am well aware of the technical systems and their accompanying theories. You seem to be unaware that quantum mechanics is still not completely understood. Not surprising, since you are being so arrogant anyway.

You can flap your fingers all day, but all you have to do is look up and read about the experiment defining a speed 10,000 times the speed of light. Debunk THAT. What is he measuring again? Nothing? Seriously, what were they measuring? Can you tell me? Where is your head at? I hope to see an explanation of what they were measuring in the above experiment in your next post, instead of more fallacious ad hom, etc., that is, if you are even worth the waste of my time. If you choose to keep your head in the sand, then that is your business.

That nothing can travel faster than the speed of light was just a theoretical aspect of general relativity. It was a theory. You are clinging to it like it's your religion, despite an experiment done just last year that shows we are looking at a phenomena that operates across physical locations many, many, many times faster than the speed of light. Apparently anything that can travel faster than the speed of light must scare the hell out of you, like an old Christian who has just heard the blasphemy, that the Earth revolves around the Sun. You're the pathetic kind of "skeptic" that only serves to hold society back all throughout history. Come back when you're no longer afraid of new ideas, and no longer worship old science like a religion. Until then, there is nothing anyone can even say to you, no different than a Bible-thumper. You may refuse to learn anything new, but science won't.

[edit on 17-10-2009 by bsbray11]



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 09:22 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


"Wrong, without the human brain consciousness can not exist."

Sirnex, I don't wish to become negative towards your opinion or argue this point, because I see that you seem quite adamant and certain, and enitled to an opinion as anyone else. I would simply like to ask how you might possibly know such a thing with any certainty, or what method you used to arrive at this conclusion?


Many of the "new age" groups and cults haven't helped this subject. In fact some seem to have set out to ensure this subject has less credibility than even mainstream science would give it. There is no need to have "awakened kundalini", "opened chakras", "achieved samahdi", "trance" nor any so called mystical or spiritual state, nor any of the other myriad new age mumbo jumbo terms usually driven to support some system, agenda, dogma, or sell books. These things seem to complicate something that in essence is simple, as does the many often negative scientific opinions. This is a real phenomenon that can be learned. The only practical difference between the normal sleep state as opposed to a conscious OBE is psychological. A certain conscious and aware state, as opposed to its opposite. Science is useful, perhaps indispensable, but it seems very often quite assuming where the human psyche is concerned. I find it more than possible that our psyche is not physical in nature, although it is obviously intertwined with our physical selves. I have yet to find where science has exactly quantified what a simple thought is in and of itself with genuine certainty, or a feeling, apart from physically observing the relationship of such things to the body and often assuming there is no more. Which although useful and interesting, is perhaps incomplete.

No extraordinary talent is required to experience what is termed "astral travel", apart from being an ordinary person with curiosity and a wish to experiment. I have actively experimented with this subject for several decades and I know that not only can consciousness certainly exist without the brain or any 3 dimensional physical form for that matter, but also that it most certainly does. Though you will have no way of knowing for sure whether I am delusional or not, and only a fool might truly believe in something they have no knowledge of. In this way I understand your point of view, though a sceptical but curious type of open mind can be helpful. I enjoyed this thread, it seems its originator has some genuine experience in this area.



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cogito, Ergo Sum
There is no need to have "awakened kundalini", "opened chakras", "achieved samahdi", "trance" nor any so called mystical or spiritual state, nor any of the other myriad new age mumbo jumbo terms usually driven to support some system, agenda, dogma, or sell books.


All of the terms you just referenced are actually Eastern terms that are hundreds, if not thousands of years old.

I assure you, no one came up with them to make money selling books. Gutenberg was many years later.

Science is fine by itself, a useful tool as you say, but there is no scientific evidence against any of the things you mention. To prove a negative is really very difficult to do anyway. But actually there is increasing scientific verification of many of these ancient Eastern systems. I refer you to Dr. William Tiller of MIT for one example among many of Eastern wisdom being incorporated into modern scientific research. This is all very recent work so it is nothing to have not yet heard of it. It is something else to still be biased against it, because there is no good reason.


I have yet to find where science has exactly quantified what a simple thought is in and of itself with genuine certainty, or a feeling, apart from physically observing the relationship of such things to the body and often assuming there is no more. Which although useful and interesting, is perhaps incomplete.


Right. These are called "quanta" of experience and are a total mystery to science to this very day. There is a gap between analyzing and experiencing that science has yet to cross. In other words, science has no idea how to re-create consciousness, or even measure its existence.



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


Tool? YOU truly ARE ignorant. I couldn't imagine someone being more senseless and arrogant at the same time than you have demonstrated.

In fact there are several types of electrical form. Fields, currents, static. I am sure you already knew that, as I am sure you already know everything and should be appointed the smartest person in the world to tell everyone how everything in life and universe is LOLOLOL. You are poor, in several ways I imagine.

It is interesting that you believe the body was created first and then life breathed into it next. You are a nut to believe this. Can you explain why the body would be created like an automobile? The car comes off the production line and then gas is applied for the engine to come to life. What drives the need for a car? Our need to travel faster. What drives the need for a physical body? Well I am sure you already know this, though you have not shown what it could possibly be, nor have you explained anything - short of your ability to call names when somone makes you like like the Tool you proclaim of others.

What causes the heart to beat? Electrical impulse. What causes the brain to fire? Electrical impulse. Where did the need for a physical body come from? Consciousness. You are so arrogant to believe that consciousness exists because we - in physical form xist as human? You are a fool to think this, much as I would be a fool to try and tell someone that they are nothing more than flesh when anyone with half a brain can distinguish their self from their body.

Again, I hope you can find a way to be more than what you believe you are, but it is becoming refreshingly obvious that you are nothing more than a black spot on the face of intelligence and you need to be burned off, for the good of all humanity.



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 10:08 PM
link   
bsbray 11,

My point wasn't so much as to the validity or otherwise of these, mostly eastern terms, or the philosophy around them. My point was that an illiterate who has never heard of them can astral travel. It doesn't require anything that every ordinary person does not already possess, apart from some practice and experimentation. Though it is often encapsulated withinin cult philosiphies and dogma where people are expected to revere some "new age" guru who is seen as special, and also used to sell all sorts of things such as books in ways that I sometimes find a bit misleading. Which is not to say that there is no useful literature on the subject. Just an opinion from my experience.



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Cogito, Ergo Sum
 


I personally have never purchased any of these books, but I have read several articles. It seems that the material that is written doesn't come from an individual that has had the experinces, but from someone who is writing something they read somewhere. I think that many of them write what they think would work, with no type of proof that it has worked for individuals. There are a couple things I have read that describe how it happns for me, so I know the author has had the experince personally.

I also agree that anyone, regardless of there education or any other background type, can have these experiences. The thing I think they must do for it to happen though is they must believe it is possible.

If someone having a dream would become aware in the dream and start to hav a lucid dream I believe they could go one step further during the dream and "get out" atrally.

By realizing you are dreaming and stopping the dream all you would have to do is try to stnad up and open your eyes. It is possible when you do this that you will then be in your astral body and environment.

Thanks for your post.



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cogito, Ergo Sum
bsbray 11,

My point wasn't so much as to the validity or otherwise of these, mostly eastern terms, or the philosophy around them. My point was that an illiterate who has never heard of them can astral travel. It doesn't require anything that every ordinary person does not already possess, apart from some practice and experimentation.


Same with chakras. Same with kundalini. You may never have heard the word "chakra" but I'm sure you are certainly familiar with the sinking feeling in your gut when you are emotionally depressed. In the West we simply have no common categorization for such sensations of the body.


Though it is often encapsulated withinin cult philosiphies and dogma where people are expected to revere some "new age" guru who is seen as special, and also used to sell all sorts of things such as books in ways that I sometimes find a bit misleading.


Ah, ok, so before books your excuse is that the gurus were just trying to mislead a bunch of people into following them. I see that you are totally devoid of the bias you recognize in others.



posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 11:57 PM
link   
bsbray11,

Personally, in every instance with new age groups that I have had the pleasure or otherwise of working with what I have said holds true, in my considered opinion. I obviously haven't looked into all of them, and can also be wrong about the ones I have. It is not unknown for me to be wrong. Same with a lot of literature on the subject, which I know directly to be misleading and unhelpful. I am not devoid of what you perceive as bias. Based on my direct experience, it might be lacking in common sense for me to view it differently. If you have found different in some way or see my hypocrisy, good on you, I wish you continued success. No guru or philosophy can give you the gift of astral travel, yet many children who have never heard of these things do it quite naturally.

I haven't said any of these things don't exist, just that it is not necessary to study or "believe" in them, and it can actually complicate the subject of astral travel unnecessarily, as well as giving all sorts of preconcieved notions where none need exist. There is an "airy fairyness" to much of the "new age" that I find silly. If you find that it is myself who is foolish, that will obviously be true as you see it. As far as the emotion you describe having much to do with what might be termed "chakras", I wonder what would make you so sure. We all have emotions, but why are "chakras" necessarily involved? Could you elaborate, from personal direct experience?

[edit on 18-10-2009 by Cogito, Ergo Sum]



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 12:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cogito, Ergo Sum
As far as the emotion you describe having much to do with what might be termed "chakras", I wonder what would make you so sure.


The feeling itself.


We all have emotions, but why are "chakras" necessarily involved?


Anyone can travel out of their body; why does "astral projection" have to be involved?



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 12:23 AM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


I can see my astral body, directly experience this other dimension the same as I can experience my physical body and realm. This way, directly I have come to know, though it doesn't have to be called astral travel.

Have you held a "chakra' in your hand? have you watched one to see what happens during an emotion? Are you certain this way that they are in fact there, of what you say?



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 12:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Cogito, Ergo Sum
 


No, I have not held chakras in my hand, neither have I ever held a diamond in my hand to my recollection.

It is real because I can feel a sinking feeling in my gut, butterflies in my chest, and I can feel love in my heart, amongst many other things. No matter what name you want to give this system of energy, including hormones, electrical impulses, and everything else that gives rise to these feelings, it is going to be there. Yes, I have had personal experience with it. I don't think the question is whether or not any of us have experience with these things. The question is whether or not we pay any attention to them, and what we call it. If you want to discriminate based on the fact that the word "chakra" comes from the East, so be it, but these are exactly the energies the word "chakra" represents and they are no less real than anything else you could talk about.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join