Title: | Psychic Phenomena |
Notice: | Please read note 1.0-1.* before writing |
Moderator: | JARETH::PAINTER |
Created: | Wed Jan 22 1986 |
Last Modified: | Tue May 27 1997 |
Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
Number of topics: | 2143 |
Total number of notes: | 41773 |
(*) I have made an interesting observation and wanted to know if anyone out there has had this minor experience or knew what it was? Usually when going into deep relaxation I notice an extreme change in thought patterns. As I get more relaxed I noticed that my thoughts were fading away. It more or less feels like onsetting sleep. Then, *BANG*, I snap or fall through into another mode of thought. The difference is like day and night. My thoughts *feel* lighter and cooler (think tempature). A freshness permeates every thought and emotion. I tried some affirmations but they didn't seem to have any immediate affect. This is a most pleasing state of affairs but is not really a *high*. It feels like a stripping away of cares. I tried thinking about bad experiences and unwanted future events in an effort to produce fear and tension. Nothing. I didn't seem to care. It did take about 3 minutes to come out of this state of mind from whence I could produce fear and tension at will. Could this be a change in brain wave patterns? That is the only explainiation I can come up with. Any ideas?
T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
74.1 | Meditation Effects | CFIG1::DENHAM | Beam me up Scotty | Mon Feb 03 1986 08:51 | 32 |
I don't have any ideas about what is causing this but I have felt some similar things. One thing that I sometimes get is once I've gotten into the alternate mode of thought my senses seem to be heightened. Not only am I able to hear, see, feel better than I normally can, but things actually seem to look different, though I can't explain how. Also I seem to be more in tune with psychic activity in the area. I can sometimes make some predictions on whatever the universe wants me to know (I can rarely ask specific questions). >> It did take about 3 minutes to come out of this state of mind Really Mike? Only three minutes??? I find this situation almost impossible to get out of in any reasonable period of time. My internal dialog goes something like "It's time to get going" "I don't really want to" "If I don't I'll be late for/miss ______" "It's not that important" "Come on, let's come back to reallity" "NO" This type of dialog goes on for anywhere from 15 minutes to two hours. Afterwords, if I've gotten particularly deep, my though processes seem to be altered for a number of days. Even my friends and co-workers notice a difference. | |||||
74.2 | WOWBAG::MARSH | Dave Marsh, NACE | Mon Feb 03 1986 08:58 | 15 | |
It sounds to me like you have slipped into Transcedental Meditation (TM). If that is the case then the brain wave pattern will have changed substantially. TM is now considered to be the fourth major state of consciousness by many psychologists, the four states being: . Waking conciousness . Dreamless sleep consciousness . Dreaming consciousness . TM consciousness Many people do TM 'accidentally' while in deep relaxation, as it is a natural process. Dave. | |||||
74.3 | SHOGUN::BLUEJAY | Birds have more fun! | Mon Feb 03 1986 12:26 | 5 | |
Re: .1 That sounds like the dialoge I have with myself every morning just after hitting the snooze button. � :-) - Bluejay Adametz, CFII | |||||
74.4 | It done it again! | GALACH::MORGAN | Mikie | Mon Feb 03 1986 15:06 | 21 |
Ok.. I have more info on what is happening to me (maybe you too). It seems that in normal waking consiousness I think with the forepart of my brain. Maybe it's just that I think with my whole brain. Anyway it feels that way. After relaxation for about 20-30 mins I feel this change. The change feels like a heavy rolling from the front part to the rear part of the brain (maybe the cortex?). This rolling feeling is facinating to me because I can feel it starting, building, and ending. Really neat stuff. After the relocation of thoughts (it's really not a relocation of thoughts it is a closing off of the forebrain I think) I have noticed a pronounced effect I have termed "flaging". This feels like my body is waving in the air. Could this be the etheric body begining to move? Sue you have had this experience. Kathern why does it take you so long to get out of it??? I also let it proceed and got two more rolling events that seemed to deepen the experience. It got pretty boring after that so I came out and went to sleep. Thanx for the comments. | |||||
74.5 | Getting out | CFIG1::DENHAM | Beam me up Scotty | Tue Feb 04 1986 04:55 | 14 |
RE .4 I can usually get out of it in a reasonable period of time when I am only lightly under. The length of time it takes to get out are proportional to how deep I am under. I think that .3 has part of the right answer - it's something like hitting the snooze alarm repeatedly. As for the residual effects they too are proportional to how deep I was under, but not entirely. I have no motivation to try to stop them since they are some of the most pleasant feelings I can think of having. /Kathleen | |||||
74.6 | MILRAT::KEEFE | Tue Feb 04 1986 08:26 | 6 | ||
RE .4 Sounds like the same experiences Bob Monroe described in his first book, Journeys Out Of the Body. Instead of just being bored, try thinking of someone you'd like to visit, that should liven things up. | |||||
74.7 | ASCs: Mixing levels of description. | 6249::COOPER | Topher Cooper | Wed Feb 05 1986 06:18 | 119 |
A Cautionary re .0 and .4: It seems to me that you are making an error which I am very prone to myself: confusing levels of description. In particular I think that you are in danger of confusing the neurological part of the scientific level of description with the subjective experiential level. In theory it is possible to draw correspondences between these two levels: "when I feel this the following is happening in my brain." In practice it is very difficult. This is because o the correspondences are almost *never* the direct obvious ones, o very, very little is known by anyone about these correspondences, even by the scientists who study them, o what is known, tends to get badly distorted and over generalized when translated into "lay" descriptions, o there is a great deal of individual differences in what is experienced under the "same conditions": what is experienced as a bright white light by one person is experienced as a loud buzzing by another, This type of confusion happens very easily when we deal with ASCs (Altered States of Consciousness). The problem here is that the CRSC (Consensus Reality State of Consciousness), which may be partially active during the ASC and will certainly be active when we try to remember it later, does not have proper referents for what was experienced. The referents are part of the ASC's reality not the CRSC's reality. Metaphors are frequently invoked, which is fine -- but then it is forgotten that they are metaphors, which can be a serious mistake. Also, their is a tendency to try to make our experience more "real" (within the CRSC framework) by attaching "scientific explanations" to it. This is a natural tendency, but it should be resisted since it, ultimately, will interfere with *true* understanding, both of the ASC and of the scientific viewpoint (which is related to the CRSC but is not the same). I have posted (topic 76.0) a metaphor which is useful in talking about (and thinking about -- at least for me) what is going on when we experience an ASC. I'll assume in the rest of this that you have read it. Brainwaves are not really explanations for anything, they are signs of things. To try to explain a feeling as being due to a "brainwave" is pretty closely analogous to explaining a bend in a road as being "caused" by the yellow sign with the arrow on it which comes just before the bend itself. Furthermore, brainwaves are very ambiguous signs. Very different internal states may look the same as far as brainwaves are concerned. For example, deep hypnosis is the same as far as brainwaves are concerned as an ordinary relaxed waking state. There are some who say that therefore hypnosis is the same as waking. This is, I think, silly. It is different because it is *experienced* as profoundly different, and because it normally results in very different behavior. The indistinguishability of the two states to an EEG is an indication of the ambiguity of the brainwaves, not an indication of the identity of the states. Using biofeedback we can learn to recognize some ASCs which are not too far from the CRSC, and which cause instruments to record particular brainwaves. This is useful if that ASC is useful. We do not, however, actually feel the brainwave itself, and we may well misidentify a very different ASC as "having" or "not having" that brainwave. What anyone (neurologists included) knows about the "meaning" of brainwaves is limited to a very few, common states of consciousness. We tend to place the seat of consciousness subjectively in the "forebrain" because we are visually oriented culture and that is where we are seeing from: just behind the eyes. Some other cultures, and some people in our culture, do not do this. They will place the subjective seat of consciousness elsewhere, and frequently it is not anywhere near the brain. When we enter an ASC many of our cognitive habits, as well as the reasons those habits became established in the first place, tend to shift. The case in point: where your consciousness "feels" like it is located. This shift may be abrupt (for reasons discussed in note 76.0) and may be accompanied by quite intense sensations. The shift represents something quite real, and may be important, but it is not itself "real" in the CRSC sense. A close analogy is the change in body image that also frequently accompanies shifts to ASCs. The fact that, say, your legs *seem* 10 feet long is true, and may mean something important about who you are at that moment. But your legs aren't "really" (CRSC again) 10 feet long. Your consciousness is always distributed throughout your entire brain. Statements about us "only using 1/10 of our brain" and so on, are out of date and no longer believed by scientists to be true. If we break up (analyze) consciousness into a particular bunch of functions then some of these functions are associated with particular areas of the brain. This is a valid process for some purposes, e.g. studying the effects and treatment of physical or chemical brain damage. It is NOT the right process for other purposes. In particular, it is not right for studying the experience of being our Self. If analysis is the right tool for that at times (e.g., as in note 76.0), the right pieces for that purpose are likely to be very different than the right ones for studying the brain. However, we analyze it, the Self is all the pieces at once, not the pieces taken separately. The important thing is to try to understand the experience of an ASC in its own terms, or at the very least in terms of what you've *experienced*. Trying to attach labels like "brainwave", "alpha-wave", "forebrain" and "left-hemisphere" can only get in the way of really understanding your experience. It will also get in the way of really understanding what those terms mean (which is, as I've said, about a very different level of reality from the experience itself). If a scientific article reports that a particular neurological event was accompanied by reports from the subject of "their bodies feeling like they were waving in the air" then you would be justified in speculating that you had experienced the same thing. Descriptions of feelings, however, capture so little of the experience itself that you could only *speculate*, not *conclude*. Also remember that popular article about this area, even very scientifically oriented popular articles, tend to be misleading about how much is known and what it all means. Its as if scientists from Mars had dropped two spacecraft on Earth and picked up a little sand from the Gobi and some snow from Antarctica and are trying to get a picture of the whole Earth from it. Most (but, unfortunately, not all) scientists know how limited their knowledge is, but this tends to get ignored in popular treatments. Topher | |||||
74.8 | (*) | GALACH::MORGAN | Mikie | Thu Feb 06 1986 08:15 | 127 |
In response to .7 and Mr. Topher: I don't think that I am in error of mixing levels of description at all. The descriptions that I gave are the only tools I have to express an event that only I experience. Others may experience something simular and express it differently. So what? You may ask "How then will you compare notes accurately with anyone else?" I don't know and I don't really have a need to define a system of terms or meanings for experiences that I may be having soley. If it appears that I am confusing neurological, scientific and subjective terms then I will state that it was not my intention to postulate a "scientific" theory. When you only gotta' mule and plow, you use a mule and plow. That is the reason we have communication capabilities.. To be able to describe a person, place or thing and have another entity understand (to whatever extent necessary). How would you describe my (attmitedly) minor experience? Do you think that Sue and Kathern would be inclined to use your tools also? As for attempting to make my expirence more real... How preposterious! It's real already. I don't need another person or group of persons to form a consensus for me. If I were that way I would have stayed a "Born Again Christian" and not left the saftey fof the fold. I agree that brain waves are signposts of other events. The reason I asked was because I am fairly ignorant of EEG's, brainwaves and what they represent. I do know that different brain waves can represent vastly different things. When I gave reference to forebrain and cortex I was using a subjective discription of what I felt. As for not being able to feel what part of the brain I am using... I may not be able to. What I am able to do is preceive something that most people may not be able to. That is to be able to feel when there is a change in my subjective state. This also includes being able to read some of the road signs that I come to along the way. Isn't that what we are trying to do? Aren't we trying to explore our (for lack of a better term) bounderies? As for being justified in speculating that I may have had a experience because I have read about it in a scientific article or journal... B.S. I don't need a article or journal to let me know that I have had a projection of consiousness because they still don't accept the fact that humans are more than a physical body. What I can use is a spark to get me on the way. Mr. Topher, I would like to thank you for your comments and ask a few questions so that we all may get a better understanding of where you are coming from. 1. Have you had a significant ASC? 2. Have you had a significant ASC that you can state fully with confidience that it was a valid ASC? 3. Do you trust yourself to explore your universe? 4. Do you trust youreslf to explore your universe both in and out of body? 5. Just because one person dosen't see or understand a ASC does it mean that the ASC isn't real? 6. Can you really discover anything about the self with- out looking at individual pieces of the self? 7. Do you think that consiousness resides in the brain, body or somewhere else? There is a real need for study, clarification and discussion of ASC's. I understand that you were stating that we shouldn't confuse terms because that would lead to wierd claims and irrational statements. These statements may lead other people astray and hurt them inadvertantly. I know that I physicaly don't float around my bedroom. That dosen't mean that my (etheric or astral or whatever segment or part description you may care to use) dosen't. I fully agree that we don't know a whole lot about ASC's. That's why we have notesfiles and different perspectives for just about every event and experience in life. Thanx for the comments. Mikie. | |||||
74.9 | 24766::NYLANDER | Fri Feb 07 1986 01:05 | 6 | ||
.8 Right on!!!!!!!!!!! Affirm - Affirm. Alison | |||||
74.10 | An impossible situation | CFIG1::DENHAM | Beam me up Scottie | Mon Feb 10 1986 19:30 | 22 |
I'm not sure if I should enter this here or start a new base note, so here goes. Has anyone been asleep AND in an ASC at the same time? This happened to me, I got under fairly deep (sort of as I described in .1) then fell asleep. This was almost an impossible situation to get out of - kind of a double "Snooze alarm" effect. I would drift back to reality, decide I didn't like it and go off again. This continued for about 15 hours until my SO decided I should at least get up and eat something. Even so, It took a long time for him to get me talking to him and then he got a lot of "I'm not hungry. Go away. Let me alone." When I finally did get back to reality I was still tired (believe it or not). Not a bad experience though really. I'm just curious if this has ever happened to anyone else. I'm also kind of curious about what would have happened if my SO hadn't been there. Thank God for weekends! /Kathleen |