The Physics of Consciousness

Albert V.B. (April 2004)

Summary An enormous quantity of experimental results, obtained in the last few decades of the 20 th century from research groups associated to some of the worlds most prestigious universities, would seem to indicate that human awareness extends literally well beyond the simple confine of our skin. In the past, there has been difficulty to accept such notions because of the lack of possible explanations, but in this paper it is demonstrated how this revolutionary idea, stems naturally from the very principles of Quantum Mechanics and the modern multidimensional theories. The spreading of these results, results that are unknown to most people, implies that, in a not-so-distant future, we might be able to rewrite the definition of human conscience. Physics and Objective Reality There exists a principle in Quantum Physics that is very strange even to physicists. Perhaps it is because it has too much of a philosophical flavor, or it appears incomprehensible, lacking applicability or meaning generally sought in these endeavors. Physicists always search for a mechanism behind their theories, a mechanism that seems to be missing in this case. The principle I am referring to, according to the most orthodox view, expressed by those who contributed to this branch of Physics early in the 20 th century, states that it is impossible to establish the existence of an objective reality, but what is real is created at the moment one actually experiences it, and that the awareness of the experimenter is the actual agent who creates that reality. Now that you have read the previous sentence, you surely understand why this state of affair still causes a headache to physicists, whose job is to reconcile this notion, not only with their own knowledge of Physics, but also with the intuition the general population has of the world we live in. In one of his writings in 1929, Bohr wrote: The discovery of the quantum of action does not only put in evidence the limitation of classical Physics, but, throwing new light on the old philosophical problem of the objective existence of phenomena independently of our observation, it gives science an entirely new role The limit on the possibility to talk about objective phenomena, a limit imposed by nature itself, is expressed effectively, as far as we can say at the moment, by the formulation of quantum mechanics. This, however, must not be considered as an obstacle to further progress; we must be prepared to stray further and further from the habitual instinct of an immediately intuitive description of Nature. In technical terms, one says that the state of a physical system that represents our experiment is given, before the measurement, by the superposition of all possible states of reality, and, at the moment a measurement takes place, the wave function of that system, collapses into the unique state that is actually measured, that is, the reality that is actually experienced. The collapse of the wave function, according to the orthodox interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, is not caused by just the cold and blind instrument, but by the presence and awareness of the experimenter (1, 2). I would like you to notice that the fact that all states are equally possible could only mean one thing: that the state of the system is completely undefined until the measurement takes place. Undefined, in this case, does not mean that we are unable to know 1

what that state is by some personal limitation, but that the state does not exist prior to the measurement and talking about that potential state is totally meaningless (1). But let me return to the language everybody understands. What I just finished saying translates to the statement that no objective reality exists, and that reality is created every time we experience it. Let me give you a simple example: suppose you decide to measure the state of particles that can have only two possible ways of being, A or B. Thus the result of our experiment as the particle is passed through an instrument would yield either result A or result B. Lets imagine that the first particle is about to pass the instrument; at this point in time, its state is completely undefined and it is not possible, not even thinkable to predict it. We can only say that it is either A or B, but not which of the two. The instant the particle passes through, revealing for example that it is in the state B, then the reality pertaining to that particle has been established (or created). For Quantum Physics, the agent responsible for this is not the measuring instrument, but the experimenter and that means the consciousness associated with him. For this reason it is usual to say that the consciousness of the experimenter is the agent that creates reality. I dont wish to spend much time on this point, for it has been broadly discussed for over 70 years; in this essay, I will simply take this to be an established fact, a fact whose validity will be reinforced by material presented henceforth. I have insisted on the same concept because it is this fascinating phenomenon, demonstrable experimentally and rather easily, that one can base a new vision of reality that I would surely define as revolutionary. Would you not consider strange these ideas to say the least? How does the consciousness of the experimenter create reality and collapse the wave function of the particle to produce one state instead of the other? What is this medium that passes from the experimenter to the experiment? Is it some kind of ray, electromagnetic wave, or something else? The figure below attempts to represent the embarrassment of a scientist facing these question. Science is usually used to better reference points, rulers, clocks, needles and switches that explain the mechanism on which a specific phenomenon is based. But here all we have is a question mark. The experimenter is relatively far from the apparatus and nothing appears to be in the space between them, except ordinary matter. I said nothing because the experiment may be performed, as it is done typically, inside todays sophisticated vacuum chambers (such as particle accelerators, vacuum tubes, etc.), so we are allowed to say that the space between the experimenter and experiment may be completely devoid of matter. Therefore the question rises again: whats in the space in-between? Is there really something with physical consistency, something measurable, affecting the needle of a measuring device?

Moreover, are we really sure that the experimenter plays a role in the event? Is there a way that can establish a direct, one-on-one, relationship between the result obtained and the consciousness of the operator? 2

Experimental Evidence Lets work another example: Go back to the experiment that can result in only two possible states, A or B, and assume also that there is no reason to believe that state A is likely to prevail over state B, but have an identical probability to occur. This means that in a million experiments, half of the results will yield A and the remaining half will yield B. Quantum Physics says (lets repeat it) that states A and B did not have an objective reality prior to the measurement, but this reality will be created during the measurement process and the responsible agent is the consciousness of the experimenter. In the attempt to answer the question of whether there exists a direct relationship, one-on-one, between measurement results and the consciousness of the experimenter, we can pursue the matter this way: what happens if the experimenter, instead of remaining neutral he exercises the intention, his will that the result be different? For example, what happens if the experimenter wishes that states A prevail over B or vice versa? Several research groups, among them an important one associated with Princeton University (3), have been working for many years on experiments that have answered the question It might seem incredible to you, but if an experimenter exercises his will, then the results are not longer balanced: one measures, for example, more A states than B states, or vice versa, depending on the intended will. The effect, measured with statistical techniques, is very small and for this reason it can pass totally unobserved, but it is there and applies to all human beings, not necessarily capable or possessing special gifts. This is confirmed beyond any doubt by the huge amount of statistical data accumulated thus far. If we take as valid the principle that it is consciousness the agent that creates reality, then we should ask why the effect is so small. If it is the consciousness (ourselves) that is acting to change the measurement, then why not flip all one-million measurements instead of a (very) small portion of them? Surely, if consciousness would have a strong relevance on measurements, we would have discovered that thousands of years ago. The fact that the effect is little, however, should not discourage us: we are witnessing an important discovery that has no explanation, and does not fit in inside any of the present scientific schemes, neither classical nor modern, and for that reason, it may represent a turning point in the history of human knowledge. In the years to come, it will be up to Science to explain the result of these experiments. I pray you to notice that This establishes a relation between consciousness and experiments, We are talking about experimental results here, not just theories, The fact that an effect was found, even if small, is truly sensational because it demonstrates how consciousness plays a physical role in affecting reality.

Lets pause for a moment but why are we talking about Consciousness? Because a human being is his consciousness. It is not his legs or her hands that, even if missing, would not limit in any way his or her faculty of being a conscious human being. It is wrong to say: I have a conscience. We must say I AM my conscience therefore if I have an effect on an experiment, it is I-conscience who is having that effect, and then, we speak of consciousness because we wish to start to introduce the perspective that the consciousness of the experimenter and his material body may be two distinct thingsLike the experiments seem to indicate.

I think you understood well: the experiments say precisely that thought has an effect over matter. But there is much more. It is not necessary for the experimenter to touch the experiment; it is not even necessary that he be in the same laboratory. To introduce this new topic, let me give you an example taken from the scientific literature, in particular the work of a group of researcher at Princeton University (3, 4). A series of experiments were conducted over a ten years period to verify the effect of human intent, the act of volition that the experimenter can have that may influence the outcome of a device whose output should be otherwise random. The device used was an electronics gadget whose noise can be considered as an example of randomness. If we measure this signal and assign a value of A (or High) when the signal is positive and B (or Low) when the signal is negative (the device does not permit null states), and if there is no reason to expect one result to be preferred to the other, then the laws of statistics suggest that we obtain a million values of A and a million values of B for every million measurements. This is exactly what happens under neutral conditions. If, on the other hand, an experimenter exercises his will or intent that A occurs more often than B, or vice versa, quite incredibly, this is indeed what happens. The experimenters thoughts have an effect on the apparatus. This effect, as I said, is very small (in this case, it is at a level of one bit in ten thousands) and this justifies the inability to notice, but it is characteristic of the average human being, one who does not claim to have a special gift in these matters. The number of experiments performed is such that the statistical precision with which this the effect has been computed is extremely high, and it excludes completely and without doubt that we are dealing with normal deviations from a neutral behavior. It was reported that there are some individuals who are able to produce an effect much greater relative to the average of one bit in ten thousands, but the researchers, quite wisely, did not concentrate on these special people, but focused their attention on the common ones, so to maintain a level of reproducibility in the results. Here are some additional details: in each of the measurements, the voltage of the noise signal is measured two thousands times per second (2KHz), hence a ten minutes measurement consists of more than a million data points. Actually, much longer times were used and some of the measurements were carried out for several years. It is extremely interesting to see the dependence of distance and time on these results, as reported by the Princeton group. Space and Consciousness (4) - The researchers reported that there seems not to be any dependence of the effect noted on the distance. The intensity of the event is the same, without attenuation, even when the operator is separated thousands of miles from the device. This observation excludes entirely the possibility that the phenomenon is electromagnetic in origin. Under these conditions, it appears that one person in Italy be able to turn a lamp on in Australia, using nothing but her brain. It would be sufficient, for instance, to monitor with a computer the deviation from the purely random behavior of the noise signal, and then have the same computer turn the light on when a significant deviation, above a preestablished threshold, is reached. (Note: I have known that such a device was patented by the Princeton group, with US pat. number 5830064). This being the case, we must conclude that the nature of reality is a lot more fantastic than our ability to imagine it. The consciousness of the operator seems to extend without limits well beyond the normal boundaries of his skin, having effect over distances that are planetary in scale. This is still nothing compared with what comes next. Time and Consciousness (4) What happens when the operator exercises his intent on the experimental apparatus at a time different from that of the measurements? Personally I must say that the answer found to this question by the researchers is short of mind numbing, because there is still correlation between the experimental results and the intention of the operator. In less technical terms this means that the 4

operator, with her mind, is able, today, to modify the statistical distribution of the data that will be collected tomorrow. But the most amazing thing is that there exists a correlation between the intent of the operator, today, with the measurements contained in data that was previously collected. In simple terms, the operator is capable, with her mind, to produce a variance in the statistical distribution of data that was collected in the past. In this type of experiment the effects on past or future measurements are of the same order of magnitude as those conducted with simultaneity, and perhaps even greater in intensity, if it wasnt for the fact that there is a limitation on the number of available experimental data. The time shifts that were investigated were 73 hours before and 336 hours after the taking of the data, and it demonstrates that the consciousness of the operator, besides space, does not seem to have limitations in time. I remember, in this regard, to have once read Einstein had said: ...time and space are modes by which we think and not conditions in which we live. The experiments described in the preceding paragraph show an evident violation of causality, since the effect occurs before the cause. But how is it possible to obtain such results? We can certainly say that the experimental procedures followed were very robust to avoid any kind of interference: on a given date and at a certain time, the experimental device and the computer are turned on by a technician who is unaware of the intentions of the operator and probably unaware of the type of experiment being conducted. After some pre-determined time, the technician returns, saves the data and turns the computer off. In a different location, somebody (the operator) is informed of the place and time where the experiment was performed and probably is asked to decide autonomously, secretly writing it down, to exercise his volition in favor of the High or the Low. This being done, the experimenter then compares the experimental results with the intent expressed by the operator and a statistical correlation is always found. After a moment of utter astonishment, I want you to notice this is one of the best experimental demonstrations of what Quantum Physics has taught us, and that is that reality is always determined by experiment. In fact if nobody is observing a detail of reality (like in the case of the technician who is completely unaware of the experiment), it is possible to create it even after a few days. I am not sure if the last sentence should be taken seriously or as a joke, or indeed holds a very profound physical meaning. Ultimately Quantum Mechanics may play a role in the Universe to eliminate the possibility of temporal paradoxes. Finally, dont believe the measured effects were obtained only on light subjects like the electrons in a diode: one obtains the same experimental results even on an apparatus involving steel balls. The important element is that the phenomenon be truly accidental, and no effect has ever been observed when deterministic phenomena, like the pseudo random distribution of numbers generated by a computer algorithm (based on a complex formula, but nevertheless deterministic); these numbers are not affected by human consciousness. Multi Dimensional Theories The experimental properties thus far associated to Consciousness cannot be explained by a biochemical brain. It is completely impossible for chemical reactions, for instance, to explain the distance and time effects and the violation of causality. It is also impossible to bring forth the notion that the brain may be a very sophisticated quantum machine, like many do today, a possibility that even this author admits as probable. But even in that case, in fact, one cannot explain the distance, time, and the violation of causality effects. It is absolutely evident that Consciousness is not a function that resides in the brain. Even if we admit that the brain surely has the ability to elaborate information locally, demonstrating its intelligence, it remains clear that some higher level human capabilities like those discussed, plus the ability to be self aware, MUST HAVE A DIFFERENT BASE TO REST ON. How is it possible to explain the observed effects? 5

To begin to understand and justify these phenomena one can invoke the modern theories of multi dimensions. I say theories because to this day the many dimensions of the Universe have proven to be only theoretical speculations, without a single proof of their existence verified so far. Exactly for this reason, the theoretical hypotheses that have been suggested, both as theories of the universe or as mathematical theories of multi dimensions, have been very numerous and started to appear in the 19 th century. Albert Einstein, with the Special Theory of Relativity, was the first to show us how time can be considered a dimension, so that, from the early years of the 1900 and to this day, we speak of spacetime as a four dimensional structure or 4-D (three spatial dimensions plus a temporal one). Since the introduction of the subsequent General Theory of Relativity, many theoretical attempts have been made, and many of these efforts have featured in one way or another the formal mathematical approach introduced by Einstein. Later I shall make specific reference to that category of theories called KaluzaKlein, which have been well documented in the work of Overduin and Wesson (5). Formulated in the early decades of the 20th century, with the intent to unify the gravitational theory of Einstein and electromagnetism, these theories have seen for many years the use of particular types of extra dimensions in addition to the four associated with Relativity. Initially these dimensions were formulated as being rolled-up down to microscopic distances, but in 1985, Visser (6) started to explore the consequences of having the normal spacetime 4-D dimensions extended by one regular spatial dimension, not rolled-up. The idea was used by others. It was then demonstrated that the addition of a single spatial dimension to the ordinary four-dimensional spacetime we know, would transform considerably the view of our Universe. It would allow that all matter contained in it being connected almost instantaneously through this fifth dimension. In other words, it would allow that points, that in 4-D would be vastly separated, up to galactic scale, to be very close in 5D (7, 8). Thus, this property we could refer to as non locality or aspatiality, may explain the unsuspected effect at a distance without attenuation. In fact, if everything we see--including ourselves--has additional spatial dimensions (more than the three ordinary ones), every object would be connected to every other object in the Universe (with a near-zero distance between them) through the fifth dimension. We note that while mathematics can easily describe such Universe, our minds trained in 4-D, is confused by it (not to say that it may even give us a mild headache while attempting to visualize the situation). There are theoreticians who have calculated that adding another temporal (non-spatial) dimension to the standard four-dimensional spacetime has the effect of bringing very close events that are very distant in time (a-temporality), but it has also strange consequences, like violation of causality. Therefore a 6-D Universe, one which has two additional dimensions (one spatial and one temporal), could resolve the dependence (or better, the lack of dependence) of distance and time as observed in the experiments of Princeton. Lets make a note, in passing, that the fact that many people often dream of facts before they actually occur, could very well be the result of this multi-dimensionality. The cause (the event) is in the future, while the effect (becoming aware of the event) is in the past. Are we constantly being exposed to phenomena that violate causality without being aware of it? I would like to emphasize that with multi-dimensions, the creation of reality through an act of observation is an obvious necessity to permit the possibility to achieve what we call violation of causality. We have seen previously that the Princeton experiments suggest that perhaps it is not possible to change a past that has already being created, but it is possible to create one that did not yet exist. The problem may be more complex than we believe to be and, having seen that the Universe admits the experimental possibility of future effects toward the past, perhaps we should humbly wait for a deeper understanding before we reject these concepts based on logic arguments alone. I conclude saying that if the violation of 6

causality is one of the characteristics of the Universe, then in some way Quantum Mechanics prohibits one from modifying the past already observed (sorry you cant change the lotto numbers chosen yesterday after seen the numbers that came out today), even though it allows the possibility to produce effects in the not-observed past. Before closing, I would like to show a typical effect of multi-dimensionality; not of a particular theory, but common to all of those dealing with spatial dimensions in general. Look at the figure below:

Imagine beings living only in two dimensions; their lives would happen in a plane and they would not even conceive of the possibility of the up-down dimension. For these beings, like the figure shows, a circle would represent a closed surface, sealed permanently from access. The flat-landers living inside the circle cannot escape (without producing a breach in the circle) and those outside cannot enter. If the wall of the circle is opaque, there is no possibility for the beings inside to ever see those outside and vice versa. For all practical purposes, the circle is a closed region of space: those inside of it can only perceive the inside and those outside can only perceive the outside. For us, who are aware of the third dimension, the circle is not a closed space, but we can see both its interior and its exteriora three dimensional being can enter and exit the circle without problem and without breaking it, simply using the third dimension. Being confined in the plane, the circle for him does not have thickness in three dimensions: he could even argue that the circle is immaterial, and being able to cross it at will as if it were spatially imaginary. In the same manner, for a being who has access to a fourth spatial dimension, any three dimensional (for us sealed) volume, would appear open and cross-able without difficulty. Whether the walls are thick or thin, of paper or cement, none of these elements would represent a barrier. The Field of Consciousness The experimental results obtained in Princeton suggest the hypothesis that we may have at least one spatial and one temporal dimension more than those normally associated with the classical fourdimensional spacetime. Being a sentient creature, with conscience, man can act to obtain the experimental effect he observes (4) while inanimate matter cannot. Man, with his 6 dimensions (4 spatial and 2 temporal) is near all matter in the universe and can span between past and future. Lets explore now how we can picture matter that is multi-dimensional, specifically the 4 th spatial dimension. From now on, I shall make reference only to the spatial dimensions, leaving out for the moment any discussion on the temporal ones. Lets start a simple case, imagining a material cube in two dimensions, like the one shown in the figure below. 7

It is obvious that the two-dimensional cube is a square, the part of the figure that is colored yellow in the above figure. If we add a third dimension, then the square becomes the familiar figure of a cube in 3-D. Lets repeat the procedure one more time, starting from a three dimensional cube and add one more dimension. Because we dont have four-spatial-dimensional sheets of paper, the drawing of the 3-D cube will have one dimension less than three so it will be drawn still like a square (the yellow square shown in the next figure). For the same reason the 3-D universe will be a plane. Lets try to see what the fourth dimension of the cube may look like. If we limit ourselves to imagine the fourth dimension geometrically, assuming it to be in principle the same as the other three, then we obtain a hypercube which as no new features; just a few extra sides and nothing special. But if we imagine a multidimensional Universe, according to Kaluza-Klein, with one extra spatial, not rolled-up, dimension(6,7,8), then things change; being the fourth dimension a-spatial, the appearance of the cube in this dimension cannot be similar or analogous to the other three. By the very nature of this fourth dimension, the part of the cube containing in it, should look more like a hill wider in the base in the other three dimensions (the yellow square) and asymptotically tending to zero, like illustrated by the purple grid in the following figure.

If it were possible to see from the three dimensional plane we live in, it would appear like a halo around the cube, an aura more concentrated around it and taping gently as we move away from it, but never reduce all to way and disappear; in fact it extends all the way to infinity. It remains to understand what type of matter would make up the cube. It is not difficult to imagine that certainly it is something very different than the matter we already are familiar with. It could be a new 8

substance not yet discovered. Surely it is difficult to think that a new type of matter with the characteristics we have just described has the normal rigidity we normally associate with matter. Even if the 3-D component of the cube was made of solid steel, probably the fourth dimensional component cannot be made of the same material and we can exclude such a possibility by using a very simple argument: By its geometrical nature (closeness to all points in the universe), the 4-D is in intimate contact with the 4-D part of all other bodies, planets and stars included, hence if it consisted of rigid matter, rigidly connected to the 3-D part, it would likely not allow motion of the cube. It would not even permit to a human body to move. Therefore it would seem probable that the human and non-human part of matter that exists in the fourth spatial dimension is not rigid, but has a rather tenuous nature, resembling more an ether than regular matter. In summary, we have said that matter in the fourth dimension should look like a kind of ether, that it should form an aura around the object (if we ere able to see it) and, because of the nature of the fourth dimension, this matter should be interconnected, like a single sea, where all 3-D bodies are immersed. Do not forget (see the above figure again) that the entire 3-D plane is immersed (literally) inside the fourth dimension. Moreover, if in addition to the substance of the fourth dimension, there were more spatial dimensions of similar nature (or more likely different), the basic argument introduced here would not change much. We are now ready to introduce the notion of Field of Consciousness, as being nothing more than those dimensions of ourselves and the rest of the Universe that are not found in the ordinary spacetime, that is, everything that is not like dense matter in 3-D. It is here that one should locate consciousness, since we have seen that it cannot be placed among the dimensional planes of ordinary spacetime, and it is not reducible to a biochemical, or a quantum computer-type brain. Moreover, the addition of a second temporal dimension would allow explaining all the observed experimental phenomena. On the base of what we have just said, the Consciousness of every human being would be connected with that of everyone else, with the consciousness of the animals, of plants and, why not, even with that type of inanimate matter in the same way a single sea would connect all submerged 3-D objects. For this reason it would be appropriate, perhaps, to speak of a single Consciousness or a single field of Consciousness. Referring to the figure below, we could for simplicity draw the multidimensional matter as a continuous curve, like the purple line. The figure shows the fact that the experimenter and the experiment belong both to this field of consciousness; accordingly, at a deep level, there is not distinction between the experimenter and the experiment, or between reality and consciousness. The meaning of the words deep level should be as multidimensional level. So you see, the consciousness of the experimenter is not limited to his own mind, therefore it is not bounded inside the limit of his skin, but it extends beyond including the experiment, which itself is integral part of the field of consciousness. For this reason, the experimenter can force the wave function of the experiment to collapse: because the experiment itself is part of the field of consciousness.

Is it your impression that you have already heard all these notions, now presented in a new modern scientific light? Today we hear a lot about extra dimensions of the Universe, but we have not yet found a single proof of their existence. In general one looks for proof among cosmological observations, in astrophysics. But if you have followed closely the arguments presented here, youd be among the few who are now aware that the only thing truly multidimensional that has been observed up to now is human Consciousness. I have mentioned previously that we may entertain the thought that the field of consciousness may have a real physical existence, measurable with methods or scientific instrumentation. I have used two separate words: methods or scientific instrumentation. With this I intend to emphasize that methods and instruments are for me distinct notions, because the former do not presuppose the use of physical measurements like, for example, those which result in an electromagnetic effect, but may be based instead on a statistical distributions, like it was done by the people at Princeton. If we accept, like everyone does, that there is validity in statistical results, then we must conclude that the field of Consciousness has indeed physical reality, or that whatever type of medium exists connecting the experimenter and the experiment, such a medium is real, since its presence can be measured with scientific methods. With this, however, we must honestly admit that we have no idea about its true nature of this medium. In Physics this has never been a great problem: I am not sure how many readers are aware that even today we dont have any idea of what really is the nature of electric or gravitational fields. In 1877 James Clerk Maxwell observed that Newton in his Principia did not reveal anything regarding the mechanism by which bodies gravitate around each other and that, since then, all attempts at resolving this difficult question were few in number, and without success. Since the time of Maxwell nothing has changed in the REAL understanding of the mechanism behind gravitation. Einstein, in his own biography Aus Meinen Spten Jahren, expressed doubts on his ability to explain definitely the gravitational effects and in 1949 wrote to his friend Solovine: there is no single concept that I could claim for sure it will stand the test of time. And I am not even sure to be on the right path To this day the question is still unresolved. We know the effects that the fields produce, but we dont have even the faintest idea of what is their true physical nature, of what, for instance, fills the space between two electrical charges, space that we continue to consider as identical to the space in the absence of electric fields. Thus we continue to accept as fact that Science can utilize, in a very sophisticated and numerically accurate way, concepts without knowing their true nature. Then why dont we do the same thing with the field of Consciousness? And those researchers that are dealing with these issues, like the group in Princeton, have now started to shift their approach exactly in that direction. Besides, the first experimenter who started to play with a piece of amber to see why, when rubbed with wool, it attracted weakly small pieces of paper, could have minimally guessed that the work he had so timidly started on electricity, would have resulted in modern computers, telecommunications, illumination, transportation, and everything electric our modern 10

civilization uses it to the point of not being able to progress without it. So who can tell today where the study of Consciousness will be leading us? In regards to the possibility of measuring the field of Consciousness with scientific instruments, can we totally exclude the possibility of being able to do that one day? Deep down, every thing we are able to detect the effects of, must have necessarily physical existence. The only limit is our lack of knowledge. In a time when the existence of electromagnetic waves was unknown, cellular phones, which you carry in your pocket, if seen at work would have been considered an object of witchcraft and it would have been burned, with you still holding it, to the stake. Today it is probably already possible to detect the field of Consciousness with scientific instruments, even though the matter is extremely controversial. There exist photographic techniques that, when combined with electromagnetic fields of varying intensity and frequency, produce the image of a person (or an object) surrounded by an aura of colorful light. That aura might be an image of the Consciousness field around an individual. In the figure where I have drawn the field of consciousness, I made it larger in intensity, showing a peak corresponding to the person or the object (i.e.: the experiment). Thus, the idea of drawing it the way I did was not entirely artistic; but remember that here I am expressing personal opinions and conjectures. To this day and on this earth there exists no scientific notions that would allow us to say that what is seen in those photographs is somehow related to the field of Consciousness, or something related to it. Conclusions Lets make a few considerations: according to what we have been discussing, the men (in the figure below) would be like several focalization points of a single field of Consciousness, like waves in a single sea.

Considering that we are our conscience and that the experimental observations described earlier in this article prevent us to identify conscience and body, then if human beings avoided identifying themselves as their bodies, but accepted the idea that we may be part of something dimensionally broader, probably spanning a wider Universe with the ability to access infinitely higher levels of experience, perhaps we might understand why all mystical cultures on Earth insist on saying that all men are brothers, children of the same Father. I dont believe this last statement is so out of place; if you look at the figure above, the men should not be those that are drawn as figures in black (the bodies), but the waves drawn in the same sea of Consciousness, and indicated by the purple line. Moreover, the body is known to be mortal, but what about the Conscience? It would seem important to establish scientifically whether our consciousness survives our death. By identifying ourselves with our mortal bodies, perhaps causes those conditions we call pain and fear of death; it is possible that Science may be able to free humanity of these seemingly unavoidable conditions. Science may prove that identification with our body is like trying to identify ourselves with our jacket or coat. Truth, it has been said, will make you free freedom from pain, freedom from fear, and of death. If everything is embraced by the field of Consciousness, then so is the environment we live in. At a very deep multidimensional level there is no distinction between us and our environment. We and nature, 11

including plants and animals, have emerged and are part of the same multidimensional medium. Then is it possible to affect our environment, somehow, just with our thoughts? Is it possible then, without knowing it, that billions of people are hurting the Planet and Her inhabitants, by concentrating on negative and destructive thoughts, or simply by chasing selfish dream? Our knowledge in this field is still extremely limited. We might be witnessing, however, the birth of a New Science that will start to flourish in the 21st century or even in the rest of the 3rd Millennium. I remember the famous phrase: Man, know thyself and thou shall know the Universe and the Gods . Isnt this exactly what we are hoping now? The discovery of the incredible properties of Human Awareness leads directly to the notion of multidimensional Physics and the knowledge that the entire Universe is multidimensional, with all the consequences that may derive from that. The above statement today appears to have a scientific flavor attached to it, and it sounds like a prophecy from the ancient past to the people of our time. In my opinion this matter is one of the greatest challenge Science faces and this challenge can only lead to a giant step forward in the evolution of Humanity. I remind you again that the first researchers that started by playing with amber and the way it attracted little pieces of paper, had no idea that those tiny forces are the same identical ones that today can move a train. In the same way, this first and weak effect of the multidimensional nature of consciousness and its deep physical connection to reality, may one day upturn totally the way we perceive life. I am not saying that we will be able to move trains with our thoughts. There are plenty of technological methods to do that already and after all these have not really improved the human condition, but it may lead to the discovery of who or what we really are, of what is the meaning of our life, of what is meant really by the verb to be and to whom should it be applied to, where are we going and what are we doing here, and if there are higher levels of experience, and in light of all this: what is really important for humanity and what instead is irrelevant, and how all this may perhaps lead to live our lives in a world in a way enormously better than the way Humanity has ever experienced until now. References 1) Gian Carlo Ghirardi Un occhiata alle carte di Dio Il Saggiatore Milano 1997 2) Interesting point of view of Amit Goswami in The Visionary Window: A Quantum Physicists Guide to Enlightenment - Quest Books, 2000 it can be found also on: http://noetic.org/publications/review/issue56/r56_Goswami.html 3) The homepage of the research group Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research can be found at the address: http://www.princeton.edu/~pear . In the beginning of 2007 this group informed that they ended their experimentation at the Princeton University. It is possible that their beautiful Internet site will be moved at: http://www.icrl.org/ . 4) R. G. Jahn, B. J. Dunne, R. D. Nelson, Y. H. Dobyns, and G. J. Bradish: Correlations of Random Binary Sequences with Pre-Stated Operator Intention: A Review of a 12-Year Program - Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 345367, 1997. It can be found also at the address: http://www.princeton.edu/~pear/correlations.pdf 5) J.M. Overduin, P.S. Wesson: Kaluza-Klein Gravity Available on http://www.arXiv.org (Ref.: gr-qc/ 9805018 7 May 1998) 6) M. Visser: An Exotic Class of Kaluza-Klein Models Physics Letters B159, 22-25 (1985) Available on http://www.arXiv.org (Rif.: hep-th/ 9910093 12 Oct. 1999) 7) G. Klbermann, H.Halevi: Nearness Through an Extra Dimension Available on http://www.arXiv.org (Ref.: gr-qc/ 9810083 - 29 Oct 1998) 8) G. Klbermann: Communication through an extra dimension - Int.J.Mod.Phys. A15 (2000) 3197-3206 - Available on http://www.arXiv.org (Ref.: gr-qc/ 9910063 - 21 Oct 1999)

12