Conference hydra::dejavu

    Not sure this counts, but I'll give it a shot.
    
    A friend and neighbor of mine, a retired doctor (MD), was one of
    the first people (years ago) to believe in the usefullness of
    hypnosis in areas never before thought of or tried. For example,
    he was one of the first to work with police departments hypnotising
    crime witnesses to get more accurate details of exactly what they
    saw. He, himself, underwent major surgery with no anesthesia and
    controlled everything. Pain, blood flow, heart rate, etc.
    
    His wife has an advanced case of hodgkins disease. She shakes so
    bad that she can't even hold a cup of coffee. BUT, you'd never know
    it to look at her. He gives her periodic suggestions that basically
    tell her NOT to shake and she doesn't. This seems more amazing to
    me than his undergoing surgery.
    
    SUPPOSEDLY, there is NOTHING that can be done about this disease
    and the shaking that comes with it. It is a disease of the nervous
    system that the person has absolutely no control over. YET, apparently
    the mind CAN control it.
    
    Given this, I firmly believe that the mind has powers we havn't
    even begun to understand.
    
    Steve

    re .1
    
    Pearce talks about that kind of control as well, and suggests that
    we do in fact have the ability to control our bodily functions to
    an extereme degree.
    
    The fire-walking (and other) phenomena seem to be qualitatively
    different, however.  It appears as if there is not only an ability
    to control pain, but also control to prevent the flesh from being
    scorched.  Some who take part in the ritual do not achieve this
    state and are horribly burned.
    
    Pearce suggests that the phenomenon of flesh being burned by flame
    is just a construct of our consensus reality, and that
    it is possible to throw off the constraints imposed by a belief system.

    I believe that's what Castaneda's allegory suggests as well, but
    Pearce seems to have documentation to back it up.  Anybody wanna
    start a new note on Casteneda?
    
    	bruce

    
    
    re .2
    
    There already is a note on Castenada, #18.
    
    Carole
    

    I think that there is, for many individuals, benefit in firewalking
    as self-affirmation and self-trust.  I do not think that "mind"
    is in any real sense preventing flesh from burning.  I think that
    there is a physical process (several have been proposed) which
    (usually) prevents real damage from being done.  Confidence seems
    to have a lot to do with getting the right pace etc., and there
    may be some level of self pain control (pain is very dependent on
    attitude).
    
    People are badly burned not to uncommonly.  These people, excepting
    the very few who panic or fall, are not apparently distinguishable
    from the people who don't.  If the bed is properly prepared, if
    you walk confidently, with a regular pace, neither too fast nor
    too slow, you will probably come through without burning yourself.
    
    The main trick is having the confidence to try it.
    
    There is a big difference between the hypnotic phenomena mentioned
    and firewalking.  A relatively few individuals (I would guess between
    15 and 25% of the population) are capable of this level of control
    -- at least using known techniques.  Virtually everyone who can
    walk comfortably can (probably) safely fire-walk.
    
    Hypnotic phemonena clearly establish that people can control their
    bodies to an extent which medical science cannot currently explain.
    Its not that there is no *physical* explanation possible, its just
    that we do not know of any mechanism in the body which explains
    it.  Control of matter to a significant degree which cannot be
    explained adequately by current physical science is a much rarer
    and more erratic ability.
    
    					Topher

    Try this experiment:

    Heat a pan on the stove.  Throw some water droplets as the pan gets
    hotter.  In the beginning, when the pan is just warm, the drops will
    just sit there slowly evaporating.  As the pan gets hotter, the drops
    will burst into steam and are gone fast.  However, when the pan is
    still hotter, you will notice that the drops don't evaporate as fast as
    before; you will actually see them kinda dancing and lasting some time.
    What is happening is this: at very high temperatures, the outer layer
    of the drops converts to steam in a flash.  As steam is a better insulator
    than water, the layer of steam actually protects the water from the full
    effect of the heat; hence the bubble lasting longer at higher temperature
    than at lower.

    Something similar seems to be happening in fire-walking.  The perspiration
    on the soles of the feet flashes to steam, and, viola!  No burning.
    Further, charcoal and bricks don't get as hot as, say, steel balls when
    red hot.  Have you seen some folks toss burning charcoal in their hands
    without ill effects?

    -- Rav Karwan

    Yes, that is a frequently proposed explanation.  It's known as the
    Leidenfrost phenomenon or the Leidenfrost effect.  There is an
    unfortunate tendency for scientists, when dealing with phenomena
    which seem a little "spooky" or mystical, to speak of "explanations"
    when under other circumstances they would talk of "hypotheses" or
    of "possible explanations".  The Leidenfrost effect is quite plausible
    as an explanation, but has not been demonstrated to apply
    experimentally.  I've seen some calculations which seem to indicate
    that it is not sufficient by itself to explain what is going on,
    but those calculations are based on quite complex assumptions and
    measurements, and so may not be correct.
    
    Another partial explanation which has been proposed is the insulating
    effect of a coating of ashes which is picked up by the feet.
    
    To be more specific about your last point, coals, bricks and charcoal
    all can get as "hot" (reach the same temperature) as steel, but
    they have a lower "specific heat" which means that the temperature
    is transfered more slowly.
    
    Throwing the burning charcoal back and forth between hands is not
    quite analogous since the contact is much lighter.  It does demonstrate
    your point, however, since I would hate to do that with a chunk
    of iron which had been sitting awhile in a charcoal fire.  Watch
    out though, there is an old fire-eaters trick of eating a hot coal
    -- in reality a charred marshmellow has been concealed among the
    coals.  In any case, part of the ability to handle a burning chunk
    of charcoal may be due to the Leidenfrost effect, rather than to
    the low specific heat.  The hands are definitely damp enough for
    the Leidenfrost phenomenon -- a standard demo for it used to be
    to pour molten lead across an uncupped palm (I've seen a film of
    this once; the demo has been replaced with pouring liquid nitrogen
    across the palm -- which I have seen done several times -- but this
    doesn't involve the evaporation of water).
    
    I don't know about charcoal, but I can testify, on the basis of
    brick sidewalks near a local swimming pool when I was growing up,
    that uncalloused feet can be burned from contact with bricks far
    below the temperature of burning charcoal.  Brick and stone (both
    of which are used sometimes in firewalking) have a higher specific
    heat than charcoal.
    
    					Topher

    Somewhere -- in "Time" perhaps? -- I read about a science professor
    who instructed his students by entertaining them.  One of his
    tricks was firewalking.  As I remember, he studied it out well
    before he tried it, and decided that he would be sufficiently
    nervous about the stunt so that his feet would sweat enough to
    produce the moisture that would turn into the protecting steam.
    His theory was correct, and he performed the trick many times.
    But eventually ... he became too complacent, and burnt his feet!
    
    							Ann B.

    
    
    	I've always heard that after firewalking, you will have a 
    totally different perspective on life.  Has anyone heard this?
    I've never firewalked, but would love to try it.
    
    
    BTW  Heinlen has recently written a book that has to do
         with an individual who undergoes a dramatic change in perception
         immediately after walking through the coals.  Entitled "JOB
         A Comedy of Justice".  

Pearce states that in 1935-36, The English Society for Psychical
Research ran a series of tests on 2 Indian fakirs. 

"The Indians walked the fire under control conditions, under the
skeptical and probing eyes of science itself...... No chemicals
were used, no preparations were made, they repeated the
performances under a variety of conditions and over a period of
several weeks, on demand. Surface temperatures were between
450-500C, the interior termperatures were 1400C. 

"A high point was reached when one of the fakirs noticed a
professor of psychology avidly intrigued and dumbfounded. The
fakir, sensing the longing, told the professor he, too, could
walk the fire if he so desired... by holding the fakir's hand.
The good man was seized with faith that he could, shed his shoes,
and hand-in-hand they walked the fire ecstatic and unharmed."


He also cites Atlantic Monthly MAY 1959 
and National Geographic April 1966   for 'reputable' reports
of fire-walking.
    
    	/bruce

RE: .9
    
    First, a minor clarification.  The name of the British society is
    simply the Society for Psychical Research.  The words "British" or
    "English" are frequently prefixed to avoid confusion with the American
    Society for Psychical Research (the ASPR) which was founded a couple of
    years after the SPR.  What is being said is actually the English
    [Organisation named the] Society-for-Psychical-Research.
    
    At one point there was a need for "reputable" testimony to the
    existence of firewalking, but today it has become commonplace --
    both through many, many observations in villages throughout Asia
    and the Pacific, and through its importation into the US (especially
    though not exclusively California).
    
RE: Whichever on change of view after firewalking.
    
    Most of the psychological reaction to firewalking seems similar
    to that gotten from deliberately falling backward into someones
    arms, from skydiving, etc.  Confronting and conquering your fears
    in a very direct form -- for no other reason but to conquer them
    -- produces very strong exhileration.  Add to *any* unusual experience
    an expectation of a change in consciousness (particularly one driven
    home through hours of "preparation" (indoctrination)) and the effect
    will be magnified for most people.  It could well change the life
    of someone who is "blocked" by a fundmental lack of self-confidence.
    
    				Topher

The image of the person who walks across a bed of hot coals to exit unscathed
is pretty much a myth.  In the south sea islands (where firewalking originates)
it is really more like fire *running.*  People do burn their feet, but they
have very heavy calluses which protect them.

The coals used in yuppie firewalking seminars are VERY small (marble size or
smaller) and and carry relatively little energy.  Some seminars have the
firewalkers dip in a bucket of water before starting and all of them, to
my knowledge, have the walkers stand in a trough of water immediately after
walking.  These people burn their feet; they just don't feel it due to
self-hypnosis.

Firewalking does not produce "altered realities" where feet do not suffer
physical damage.  It that were the case, we would hear of fire *standing.*


John M.

.12>              -< Hoo! Ha! Hoo! Ow! ssssssssssssssssss... >-
John, is this your impersonation of the first man on the sun?? ;') 

>yuppie firewalking
I like that :-)

When I was in high school, you weren't anything if you couldn't put out a
cigarette butt with your bare foot. Course, runnin around barefoot all
summer helped.

Jay

    
    Re.12 - yuppie firewalking
    
    Was the water just tap water or was it Perrier with lime?
    
    (:^)
    
    Cindy

    
    It's not specific heat it's thermal conductivity. Some materials
    transfer energy as heat by conduction better than others. A good rule
    of thumb is that good conductors of electricity will be good conductors
    of heat, and poor electrical conductors will be poor heat conductors.
    And for good reason; electrons carry the energy in both cases. 
    
    That's all of Thermodynamics 101 for today. Please read chapters
    3 and 4 by friday. %^)
    
    
    				Lance 
                          

    I've been inspired by a show I saw earlier this week to put in
    a reply I never got around to putting in before.  More on the
    show in a later note.
    
RE: .16
    
    > It's not specific heat it's thermal conductivity.
    
    Actually its both.
    
    Imagine that heat is a fluid.  Then specific heat represents the
    amount of that fluid that a particular volume of a material needs
    to reach a particular temperature, while thermal conductivity
    represents how quickly that volume can be emptied or filled.
    
    If a coal had *zero* thermal conductivity (if it were a perfect
    insulator) then touching it would be perfectly safe since no
    heat would flow into your foot whatever temperature the coal is.
    The smaller the thermal conductivity, the slower the heat is
    transfered and the longer you can remain in contact with the coal
    before your foot reaches dangerous temperatures.
    
    On the other hand ... if a coal has a very low specific heat then
    very little heat is required to bring it to its high temperature.
    That small amount of heat will not raise the temperature of the
    foot much so very little damage will be done.
    
    The problem with Thermo101 is that it deals with situations that
    are in equilibrium or near equilibrium.  Very clearly, the
    equilibrium situation here is feet burnt to cinders.  Protection,
    whatever the details, involves keeping the situation far from
    that catastrophic equilibrium state.
    
    Here is another way of looking at it...  The the thermal conductivity
    determines what volume of the coal will have its heat energy transfered
    to the foot during the brief period of contact, while the specific
    heat determines how much heat will be contained in that volume.
    
    					Topher

RE: .12 (John)

    When this was posted I felt much of the contents of this note were
    questionable but I got distracted by another discussion and didn't post
    my doubts. 

    At midnight Monday morning Eastern Time, the Discovery Channel (a cable
    channel devoted to showing documentaries on nature and science) showed
    a segment of "Arthur C. Clarke's Strange Powers" devoted to
    firewalking. This program, and its prequal or sequel (I'm not sure
    which) "Arthur C. Clarke's Mysterious World", are programs produced in
    England (I think by the BBC) and take a tone of "There are things we
    don't yet understand, here are some of them."  They are essentially
    skeptical, emphasizing what is known and guessed without claiming to
    know all the answers. 

    Like most of the episodes of these series this particular one relied on
    a mixture of original footage and archival material.  Films of
    firewalks at a number of different locations from a number of different
    sources were shown.  Some of the archival footage I had seen before and
    some I had not.  I would judge virtually all this footage as moderately
    reliable -- i.e., most or all of it probably shows approximately what
    would have been seen by an eye witness. 

    The material confirmed (to the extent it can be trusted) my doubts
    about John's statements. 

    > In the south sea islands (where firewalking originates)

    Certainly it is traditionally practiced there and it may be one of the
    places it originates from but it is highly unlikely that it is the sole
    or even principal source of the custom.  The program showed traditional
    firewalking ceremonies from all over the world, including Sri Lanka,
    Japan, Fiji, and Greece.  I also know of its practice in India (going
    back, apparently, quite anciently), China and Bulgaria. Its practice in
    Greece goes back at least to classical times (I think it was associated
    with the Mystery Cult of Demeter).  If I had to choose a likely place
    for a single origin from among these I would choose India, but it is
    much more likely that it was independently "discovered" in different
    places at different times. 

    > ... it is more like fire *running*.

    I have read dozens of reports of firewalking in various places from all
    over the world, from by-standers, native participants and non-native
    participants.  The constant advice is "Don't run, don't stop, pick your
    feet up promptly and put them down flat and firm." The program
    surprised me by *not* mentioning the "Don't run" part but only the
    latter part (although it is rather hard to put your feet down flat and
    firm and run at the same time). 

    It was noticeable that how definitely the "flat and firm" advice was
    visible varied with the culture being shown.  Many walked quite quickly
    (not surprising: a -- the temperature of the air over the fire pits is
    universally described as uncomfortably hot; and b -- walking fast is
    the easiest way to make sure you pick your feet up promptly) but some
    elderly people moved quite slowly.  (By the way, I'm only talking about
    the native ceremonies here, since that's what John was referring to).
    I do know, by the way, how to spot slowed down footage of someone
    running, and, because of John's note I was watching for it.

					Topher

RE: .12 (John)

    > The coals used in yuppie firewalking seminars are VERY small (marble
    > size or smaller) and carry relatively little energy.

    This is a side issue, but I question the identification of this with
    yuppies.  I think that you would find if you checked that yuppies are
    relatively under-represented for their age and financial resources
    among the clientele.  To the extent that yuppies are a distinguishable
    group they tend to be rather practical and frequently scientifically
    oriented.  "Fast food spirituality" is not generally attractive to them
    (yes, I know all about the media stereotype -- but I have yet to meet
    anyone who actually fits it, despite being, as a "high-tech engineer"
    in a high-tech district in constant contact with "yuppies"). 

    Anyway... 

    The physics of this just doesn't work.  What matters is not the heat
    content of individual coals (actually generally charcoal, by the way)
    but of the bed in contact with the foot. 

    As I discussed in note 555.17 the thermal conductivity determines what
    volume of the bed's heat is transferred to the foot.  For simplicity
    consider the volume involved to be shaped like a "cylinder" with a foot
    shaped cross-section.  The thermal conductivity determines the depth of
    that cylinder.  Thickness of the bed beyond that depth is irrelevant --
    in the time of contact there is not time for heat from greater depth to
    be transferred that far.  (This is grossly simplified, of course, there
    is no sharp cut-off of volume "drained" of heat from volume unaffected,
    but its a convenient way to picture things and actually not too
    inaccurate with some fudging of numbers).  There is no doubt that the
    specific heat of charcoal is high enough that if the depth of heat
    transference is marble or even pea sized then the foot would be badly
    burnt.  I would guess that a *very* thin layer of the bed, say less
    than a millimeter, is actually involved in the heat transfer.  If so,
    then pea size, marble size or basketball size is irrelevant to the
    transfer of energy. 

    Where the size of the coal may make a difference is in the distribution
    of weight.  Smaller coals would mean more points of contact between the
    bed and the foot.  This in turn means less weight on each point of
    contact, and thus a weaker contact at each point. 

    In any case, I watched the "yuppie" firewalk shown in the program
    (from, I think, Westwood, LA) quite carefully.  The bed looked like a
    barbecue pit with "briquette" sized chunks in evidence where they were
    walking.  So, while smaller chunks may frequently be used, its use is
    not universal and therefore, even if it helps, it is not critical. 

    The footage of this firewalk was distinctly neutral and was probably
    made by the show's own crew.  No effort seemed to be made to be either
    complementary or uncomplimentary to the participants as would be
    expected with a biased crew.  Generally, they came across mildly
    foolishly, so if there was bias it was mildly anti-firewalking. 

					Topher

RE: .12 (John)

    > ... and all of them, to my knowledge, have the walkers stand in a
    > trough of water immediately after walking.

    It is generally recommended that the feet be cleaned after the firewalk
    to make sure that no embers are stuck to the feet.  In descriptions
    I've read of firewalks, native and "yuppie," this is sometimes
    accomplished with a damp cloth or a trough of water, but more
    frequently simply by scuffing ones feet on the ground.  There was no
    clear shot of anyone's feet at the end of the Westwood firewalk but no
    trough was evident near the firepit in any of the long shots. A
    sympathetic crew might have avoided showing it, but as I said, the crew
    didn't strike me as noticeably sympathetic. 

					Topher

RE: .12 (John)

    > [of native firewalks] People do burn their feet but, they have very
    > heavy calluses which protect them.

    Well, I sort of agree with you, but I wouldn't put a whole lot of
    significance on it.

    We have to distinguish three levels of result of a firewalk:

    1) No discomfort and no subsequent damage reported.  This is the
       common result for native walkers in native ceremonies, and fairly
       frequent for Western walkers in Western attempts (both "empowerment"
       ceremonies and experiments).

    2) Minor discomfort and/or minor easily ignored burns.  This is
       occasionally reported in western ceremonies and usually reported
       from Western walkers in native ceremonies.

    3) Severe burns.  Occasionally reported in all categories.  Sometimes
       this seems to be caused by someone "breaking the rules", i.e.,
       running, stopping, shuffling, etc.  Sometimes, however, it has
       no obvious cause (both the Eastern "religious" and the Western
       "personal empowerment" explanation for this is lack of purity
       of thought of one form or another, but it would seem that this is
       assumed rather than
       observed).  For this reason I would not personally participate
       in any such ceremony without an awfully good reason.

    I think the callus factor and the "self-hypnotic anesthesia" effects
    account for much of the difference between results 1 and 2.  The
    Western firewalks seem to compensate for the lack of calluses by
    being quite consistently shorter, and perhaps sometimes with other
    factors (such as the smaller coals for better weight distribution).

    The program showed an experiment performed by a Sri Lankan professor.
    He measured the amount of time that subjects could hold their foot
    against a light-bulb comfortably.  An older, well callused Sri Lankan
    was comfortable roughly 10 times longer than a younger, generally
    shoe-wearing one.  The experiment was not particularly rigorous
    (conditions were not blind, and the older Sri Lankan was described
    as having done many fire-walks which might be a confounding factor,
    and of course, age, independent of callus level might have influenced
    the results) but it was quite suggestive.

    The real mystery lies in why firewalks aren't always in the third
    category.  I have little doubt that the answer is neither paranormal nor
    supernatural but I don't think that anyone has demonstrated that they
    know the answer.

					Topher

    Topher, please define "paranormal" and "supernatural."
    
    Perhaps we should have a separate note for definitions (only)?
    
    
      thanx/bruce

    This is an old note, but then I'm an old person.
    
    I'm just reading this notes file for the first time, and browsing 
    notes of interest. With all the activity in this conference, I'm 
    surprised that there are no people that have fire walked 
    themselves and could add more.
    
    Four or so years ago, I went to a seminar called "walking through 
    fear". It took place at someone's home in central Mass. I'm sure I 
    could get details from the person who took me.
    
    Anyway, the seminar was centered on fear in general, and how we 
    overcome it. There were a number of people there, some for the 
    first time, like myself, and some repeaters, like my friend, but 
    no yuppies that I could identify. Mostly down to earth people that 
    were very open and friendly and varied backgrounds.
    
    At one point in the night, we all went out watch a large pile of
    oak set on fire. Later, we went out and added wood to the fire, in 
    a symbolic act. Sort of getting to know what we were going to be 
    dealing with first hand. It was just normal wood that you would
    burn in your fireplace, nothing special in shape or type.
    
    We did some meditation, and some guided visualization, and then at 
    the end of the night, went out and gathered around the bed of 
    coals.
    
    I'm not sure how many of us walked through the coals, or how small 
    or large they were. I only remember watching the red glow, and the 
    flames lick up now and then as the wind blew.
    
    I saw some people go through more than once. Some were singing, 
    some were laughing. I was one girl slowly dancing in circles as 
    she walked through.
    
    Myself, I walked through, and then as I was getting ready to walk 
    through again, my friend came up and took my hand, and we walked 
    through together, as if on a stroll along the beach, laughing as 
    we went.
    
    When I got home, I noticed two marks one on each foot, and in the 
    same location. They were not burn marks, but more like I had 
    walked on something pointed but not sharp enough to cut. Bruise is 
    a good word, each about the size of a pencil eraser.
    
    Now I've heard all the explanations of why I could do it, and why 
    I didn't get burned, but that is not the point. The point is that 
    everything in my past had told me that if I step on those coals, I 
    would get burned. The fear was the issue. I don't care if there is 
    a scientific reason or not. Going beyond the fear is what made it 
    a fantastic experience. It does change you, or it did me. It sort 
    goes along the way of Richard Bach's book illusions. If we see a 
    road block, then it's a road block. If we see and open door, it's 
    an open door. The choice is ours. I'm looking forward to walking
    on water, and swimming in earth.
    
    Jerry
    

    Hi Jerry, nice note - thank you. I wonder if you
    can remember the way your state changed? At the
    beginning of the evening you presumably thought
    "How can this possibly work?!" or something like
    that, and yet at the end you found it easy to do.

    And then a supplementary question; once you've seen
    how your state changed can you do it again (get rid
    of the fear)?

    It's interesting; for me I *believe* people have done/can
    do this but I still have the fear (enough to make my
    palms sweat thinking about it). I'm pretty sure I
    could make myself step onto the coals - but I'm also
    pretty sure they would burn me!
    
John D.

    Jerry, further questions. Did anyone refuse to do it?
    Was anyone hurt? I imagine that would make the make group
    feel very differently.

John D.    

    There was a point when everything changed, as to how I was
    feeling about the situation.
    
    At one point, they had us close our eyes and try to picture
    the fire. They told us to picture ourselves walking on
    the coals. I had a very clear picture of myself walking
    on the fire. My view was as if I were laying in the fire
    and I could see myself walk over me. It sounds strange, but
    that was the picture that came to me as soon as I closed
    my eyes. It was very real.
    
    When we all opened our eyes and people started to talk about
    what they saw and what it was like, I was not listening any
    more. I just had the feeling that I had already done it, and
    at that point, I could have left. I didin't need to finish it.
    When it came time to do it, that feeling was still there.
    
    	<And then a supplementary question; once you've seen
    	<how your state changed can you do it again (get rid
    	<of the fear)?
        
    It's not a state you can turn on or off. It's just something
    you experience, and learn something about yourself with. Once
    you've done something difficult, you are more likely to push
    youself in something else.  You just have to KNOW you can do
    something, and then the rest is easy.            
    
    

    <Jerry, further questions. Did anyone refuse to do it?
    <Was anyone hurt? I imagine that would make the make group
    <feel very differently.
     
    No one was hurt, although they talked about people that had been.
    They told us not to do it if we really didn't feel good about it.
    
    They also told us not to pay attention to who does or doesn't go,
    but to just worry what we were doing. I didn't realy look at to
    see if anyone didn't walk. I just watch the people that did.
    
    Jerry
    

    JERRY - 
    
    I participated in a firewalk here in Utah that was similar to the
    one you described (similar theme, meditiation, and guided
    visualization).  The basic concept to grasp was overcoming fear
    and experiencing the fact that your fears are what you determine
    them to be and you have the ability to eliminate blocks and walls
    that prohibit your growth.
    
    My son attended with me (he was 13 then).  We both walked the bed
    of coals twice.  He related to me that he felt elation and joy during
    and after the experience, as I did.
    
    I also attended a `Warrior Training' in Hawaii.  The basic premise
    of the training was throwing away old precepts and becoming open
    to new approaches to experiencing life.  Towards the end of the
    week we all broke arrows (we knew this would occur at the beginning
    of the seminar.  This was also an example of going through the fear
    and actually experiencing a physical and mental breakthrough.  WE
    put the point of the arrow against our throat and the feathered
    end against the wall.  We then went through an alignment of our
    energies with our leader and were told to think of one of our greatest
    challenges or barriers and concentrate on that as we leaned forward
    to break/shatter the arrow.  All of the participants broke the arrow
    that was a practice target arrow.  Several of us went on to break
    a stronger field arrow.
    
    It was a major breakthrough for me in helping me meet and conquer
    that which trys to conquer me.  As Jerry says, the scientific
    explanations abound but the real benefit is for the participant
    who takes that positive affirmation with them that they can overcome.
    
    TJ