The universe in your head

Rakesh Sharma, San Mateo, California — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 23:08:33 GMT

A friend of mine once said "All matter has consciousness. It is the degree of consciousness that is different". So human beings are more conscious than plants, plants more than a single celled bacteria, and a bacteria more than a pebble. After we die, information is lost. That's because we return to dust and a "lower level" of consciousness. Pretty mind wrenching, when I first heard it.

But in physics today, it would be heresy to say that inanimate matter has any degree of consciousness.

The universe in your head

steve smyth — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 00:28:03 GMT

This guy has his s... together.
I wonder how much time he has spent with Tibetan Bhuddists, or Hopi, Zuni, and Navajo Indians?
One cannot imagine how much more exciting and interesting the Cosmos becomes when there is no reason to attempt contracting the vastness in the name of understanding.
It's also impossible to lose sight of the simple fact that it's all the same place, and we are in it.
Here's the simple version...
http://smythspace.blogspot.com/2007/01/kineticism.html
Gotta love it, eh?

The universe in your head

steve smyth — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 00:29:47 GMT

almost forgot to mention the great American Philosopher, Geraldine ( Flip Wilson )...
"What you see, is wht you get!"
Forge Ahead...

The universe in your head

eston, Denver, CO — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 00:35:26 GMT

Anyone interested in these concepts should indulge themselves in the great science-fiction writer, Philip K. Dick. His Book "Valis" (as well as others) are very much in-tune with the concepts of the illusion of time, the universe being in your mind and so on.

Never be afraid to think omni-directional

The universe in your head

island — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 00:52:15 GMT

It isn't in your head, Lanza, it's in that jackhammer, dynamite, air-conditioner, space-shuttle, and everything else that we do to **efficiently*** satisfy the second law of thermodynamics in an accelerating expanding universe that has an increasing negative pressure component.

But John Wheeler was a very cool guy and a great physicist, as well. He was also born in the right city... ;)

The universe in your head

Norman LaFave, Houston, TX — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 01:39:46 GMT

Anyone familiar with John Archibald Wheeler's Meaning Circuit knows that ths coneption is far from new. We, all of us participants for all time, create the universe by our decisions and actions. The universe, in turn, evelves to create us.
Wheeler needs more credit for this unique and beautiful conception.

The universe in your head

terry backner eureka California — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 02:23:35 GMT

consciousness and the cosmos are inseparable, its our self centered identity and auto-biographical and historical sense of self that obscures our ability to perceive that we are not separate from life and the universe itself. Even our language - being structured around the false notion of individually supports this illusion and makes speaking about it problematic.

It is also problematic to say that 'we' are creating the cosmos as we perceive it, because we assume that we know who that 'we' is when we refer to it/ourselves. Neither we, nor the universe are what we believe them to be. Both orthodox religion and industrial based science are dead ends in answering the questions that they both argue being the ultimate authority on.

An unbiased spiritual exploration offers experiences that suggest cosmic unity. It is human delusion and fear that threatens the stability of life on our unique and precious planet. Hopefully people such as Robert Lanza can exert some influence on society or the 'powers' that be, and begin to bring the ship around before our fear and delusion causes irreversible damage to ourselves and the planet.

The universe in your head

ArabianMare, Bolinas, CA — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 02:29:36 GMT

There are two types of people in this world: Epiphenomenalists and Consciousness Firsters. Epiphenomenalists believe that the mind is merely a product (epiphenomenon) of the brain and its chemistry. It's encouraging to think that Lanza has joined the ranks of the CFers, which include Amit Goswami, PhD, a physics professor and Vedic scholar whose landmark book "The Self-Aware Universe: How Consciousness Creates the Physical World" should also be mentioned here.

Anyone who has had a precognitive dream has prima facie evidence of the primacy of consciousness over physical matter.

The universe in your head

Jerry M. Weikle — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 03:07:55 GMT

25...

There is something formlessly created
Born before Heaven and Earth
So silent!
So ethereal!
Independent and changeless
Circulating and ceaseless
It can be regarded as the mother of the world

I do not know its name
Identifying it, I call it "Tao"
Forced to describe it, I call it great
Great means passing
Passing means receding
Receding means returning

Therefore the Tao is great
Heaven is great
Earth is great
The sovereign is also great
There are four greats in the universe
And the sovereign occupies one of them

Humans follow the laws of Earth
Earth follows the laws of Heaven
Heaven follows the laws of Tao
Tao follows the laws of nature

Lao Tzu.
Tao Te Ching: Annotated & Explained, published by SkyLight Paths in 2006.

It seems the fundamental question "What is reality" has been attempted to discover the answer for owns perception of reality, and various individuals over historical times have been trying to make that discovery; our technology is assisting humanity where before those things that couldn't be comprehended was left to the 'gods' of our creation and perceptions.

The universe in your head

Someone Somewhere, Somewhere, NM — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 03:16:44 GMT

This is Hindusim.

The universe in your head

Nature — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 03:44:24 GMT

In the beginning there was no consciousness and thus no biocentrism.

The universe in your head

~C4Chaos , Seattle, WA — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 03:51:28 GMT

of course what Lanza says is not new. Buddhists have been saying this for thousands of years now. see this lecture by Dr. Lewis Lancaster's Burke Lecture: Buddhism in a Global Age of Technology ~http://bit.ly/11gTct (don't worry this is pure academia, not woo woo ;))

~C

The universe in your head

Terence McKenna — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 03:53:38 GMT

Magic Mushrooms can show you the same theories, and it's fun!

The universe in your head

Steven , NYC — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:09:42 GMT

To someone, somewhere.....At a certain level, this is nearly all religions out there.

The universe in your head

WolfTracks, Mesa, AZ — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:17:49 GMT

Reality is a self-induced illusion of the lack of free will authority and the fear of accountability.
We are analog beings digitally remastered continually to be controlled by absolute logic in a universal analog existance.

The universe in your head

Delta Phi — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:35:10 GMT

Thirty-five years ago, I was lucky enough to have a professor at the University of Guelph, Dr. Helier Robinson, whose lectures and book: Renascent Rationalism had a profound effect on my thinking and turned me into an adherent of Rationalism as a platform for analysis. His model of real world and perceived world saw the world as an individual interpretation and I believe naturally so. Rationalism is seen less as the belief system of empiricism and rather a personally responsible analytical state. I find it a positive and empowering system simply that it demands self-accountability. To me, though I understand the allure of empiricism as a model which seeks hard rules, we obviously acknowledge observation and conclusion so that we may organize 'the knowledge of conclusion', but we are not challenged in a personal way to understand the vagaries of human perception and the oft damaging power of religious suggestion.

The universe in your head

Scotty, Pittsburgh Pa. — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:36:12 GMT

The art of flying is to convince yourself that if you jump off a tall building and think hard enough, you'll miss the earth. This is an old argument made new with math.

The universe in your head

genepuppet — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 05:47:58 GMT

The universe has existed for many billions of years before humans or conciousness. If earthly human sentience were wiped out tomorrow, no loss to the universe.

The universe in your head

Rudy D. Franklin, New York, NY — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:59:34 GMT

Lao Tzu a great, even greats Chinese philosopher. I wish I had just little more time to continue study about Taoism...

Anyway, any time Dr. Robert Lanza's name is mentioned, share of Advanced Cell Technology, Inc.
(Public, OTC:ACTC) goes up.

The universe in your head

L. Palmer, Rathdrum, Idaho — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 09:07:46 GMT

I am therefor you are.

The universe in your head

John Saadi, Mass — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 10:39:53 GMT

I can relate to Lanza's biocentrism. Just think that if you did not have any consciousness neither the universe nor anything else around you has any meaning or significant existence. It is like the reality of the universe to a person under anesthetics it has no meaning or significance. Similarly the universe to a blind man is what is described to him by others. So the universe for a blind person can only be an idea or concept. By the same token when consciousness dies with the body everything else that it had been aware of dies with it. Hence the whole universe and everything around us do exist in our consciousness or so long as we are conscious of them. Therefore consciousness, reality, existence are all the makeup of the living brain chemistry and for as long it is functional.

The universe in your head

Michael Modelle, Vineland, NJ — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 11:05:42 GMT

This idea that if we humans think about the universe the act of thinking about it then changes it's basic characterisitics is poppycock - and the evidence that says so is manifest. What the authors have done here is to lump everything we do not fully understand into a unifying theory that has all the hallmarks of a theology. The Native American people (for instance) created a religious answer to what they observed and could not fathom. This is the same principle.

The light of life was on before man began to think about it. There were rules in the universe and physical principles that ran the clockworks long before us. Light that was created by physical processes 4 billion years ago and that has traveled thru space to fall upon the detectors of the Hubble is unsullied by the rise and fall of earth. Or man.

The universe in your head

James Hathaway, Charlotte, NC — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 11:23:20 GMT

This actually involves a central philosophical problem that philosophers have struggled with since the beginning and that is, essentially, unresolvable. What is interesting is the lack of awareness among some scientists that science itself is based on a single philosophical approach - rationalism - that ultimately is no more based on "truth" than, say, New Age mysticism. It reminds one a bit of the medieval clergy and their certainty about the nature of reality.To quote Wallace Stephens: "The river is moving/The blackbird must be flying."

The universe in your head

Kindergarten Teacher WI — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 11:31:59 GMT

So this fom of "scientific" Hindusim is accepted by many but Intelligent Design is rejected? Whose consiousness determines the universe?

The universe in your head

John Doe, Seattle Wash. — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 11:33:53 GMT

The world is like a ride at an amusement park. And when you choose to go on it, you think that it's real because that's how powerful our minds are. And the ride goes up and down and round and round. It has thrills and chills, and it's very brightly coloured, and it's very loud and it's fun, for a while. Some people have been on the ride for a long time, and they begin to question - is this real, or is this just a ride? And other people have remembered, and they come back to us. They say 'Hey! Don't worry, don't be afraid, ever, because, this is just a ride.' And we...kill those people. Ha ha ha. 'Shut him up! We have a lot invested in this ride. SHUT HIM UP! Look at my furrows of worry. Look at my big bank account and family. This just has to be real.' It's just a ride. But we always kill those good guys who try and tell us that, you ever notice that? And let the demons run amok. But it doesn't matter because: it's just a ride. And we can change it anytime we want. It's only a choice. No effort, no work, no job, no savings, and money. A choice, right now, between fear and love. The eyes of fear want you to put bigger locks on your doors, buy guns, close yourselves off. The eyes of love, instead, see all of us as one. Here's what you can do to change the world, right now, to a better ride. Take all that money that we spend on weapons and defence each year, and instead spend it feeding, clothing and educating the poor of the world, which it would many times over, not one human being excluded, and we could explore space, together, both inner and outer, for ever, in peace.
-Bill Hicks

The universe in your head

Grogley — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 11:39:17 GMT

Biocentrism, what utter nonsense! It is the human ego not consciousness that creates this type of mysticism. We believe in (not think about) deities because most cannot come to grips with how insignificant we are in the cosmos.

Biocentrism is just more philosophic blubbering or mental masterbation. And as I have said many times, philosophy is for those who don't have the inclination or wit to understand the real science of our universe.

How sad that this gets a mention along with the real work of science.

The universe in your head

James Hawk III — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 11:41:55 GMT

This is all a bit silly. It has the worst chicken/egg problem imaginable, since the Universe cannot have been created without someone there to watch it. How did they get there before the Universe? Where were they standing, so to speak? Lanza has no answer for that, and I don't expect him to come up with one.

(Interesting that a biologist would spend so much time thinking biology is the answer to all the troubling and fundamental questions of cosmology. As a computer scientist, I suppose I should posit this is all one big program executing on the most complex computer imaginable. In both cases, I believe one might detect a bit of bias in the approach.)

Apparently Bob Lanza can't tell the difference between a rock and a brick, where they're placed, or how long they've been there, respectively. That's just plain silly. (Note of order: a Ph.D. outside his or her subject of study is rarely granted any more facility with other topics than you or I. Don't be cowed by the degree.)

In the universe he suggests, once we pull away the veil of illusion, we should just be able to walk straight up to Mars and find out why all those space probes went awry. Disbelieving in gravity should be enough to let any of us fly with no mechanical contraptions required. No one has done that yet. It wasn't even done before Newton did the math. General Relativity describes the situation very well, without need of belief, or quantum weirdness. (I have no problem with quantum weirdness, though.) When observation conflicts with belief, observation must hold sway.

Cosmic constants aside--if our consciousness creates the universe, why the Hell did we create THIS one? Seems to me we could have done a lot better. And he gets us no closer to finding out why the fundamental constants (of which practically all of us are ignorant, and most of which have only been quantified for about 150 years) have the values they do. It certainly has no hope of explaining why we (or the cavemen which preceded us) decided that light should have a finite speed, nor why the free-space propagation velocity of light is about 300,000km/sec. Perhaps Bob Lanza would like to organize an experiment in which a bunch of observers decide that light speed should double, and see how that works out.

(Yes. Perhaps some other intelligent race in the universe decided light should travel at a certain speed--but on what basis? Surely they weren't born knowing about cosmological constants anymore than our ancestors 100,000 years ago were.)

To paraphrase Wolfgang Pauli, not only is Bob Lanza not right, he isn't even wrong.

The universe in your head

rqbk, nc — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 12:08:55 GMT

So, we're to believe that the universe suddenly sprang to being with the advent of the first human (or other being) with consciousness? Complete with the history of all said human (or other being) ancestors? Who didn't exist until that moment? And really, even then, only existing in some non-existent past? Riiiight....

The universe in your head

W.A. Nicholson, In my mind, In my Universe — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 12:39:21 GMT

This is far beyond my ability to "grok" and so frustratingly fascinating I truly want to understand.

Can someone explain this to us simple, single-cell creatures?

How does it resemble Hinduism, or Native American animist religions?

Inquiring (single-cell, simple) Minds want to know (and understand).

The universe in your head

W.A. Nicholson, Living in the Moment — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 12:41:07 GMT

Is this what the Beatles' song NOWHERE MAN is about?

"He's a real nowhere man,
Sitting in his nowhere land
Making all his nowhere plans
For nobody."

Sounds pretty close. But it's all too deep for me.

The universe in your head

Patrick — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 12:42:55 GMT

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God......

The Word, my friends, is a viable expression of the Will of God....the Great Architect of the Universe, the Creator...who through His Word, spoke the universe into existence, just as I, a mere Earthly architect can "speak" a building into existence long before the first nail is driven. I design building in my mind long before pencil and paper merge into plans - this is the inner voice - the voice of my will and self awareness.

So yes, consciousness and the universe are one in the same.....just as they have to be to function....for one without the other wouldn't be recognizable by man....

The universe in your head

Bodach — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 12:50:49 GMT

Hey guys! The answer is 42.

The universe in your head

BamaBoy — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 12:56:39 GMT

Life is so much stranger than fiction. I'll never understand why people spend so much time watching "housewives of orange county" when the Universe in all of her mystery and beauty is right outside of their window...

The universe in your head

Diane M. Taylor — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:08:52 GMT

Taking this idea a step further, I have already stepped out into this mind-universe because it is all within the mind of God. I center on God as the ultimate observer. The closer we come to knowing God, the more able we are to share in creating the universe or observing it, which may be the same thing.

The universe in your head

somewhere, Florida — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:18:15 GMT

There is "consciousness" and there is "self_cousciousness". They are not exactly the same. It is one thing to be conscious of the tree in front of me. It is another thing to be "aware" that i am conscious of the tree in front of me. Self-consciousness is the key point of this debate.

The universe in your head

Glen Herzog, Houston, TX — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:38:24 GMT

Boring! This is just a restatement of the scientific method - hypothesis, theory, law. Only now, those with the hypothesis want to skip the next two steps and browbeat younto acepting their hypothesis without the evidence provided by experimentation or obseration.

We've always had philosophers who considered alternate universes and time warps. Only, now they demand recognition without the proofs. Aristotle was great for hypothesis, Gallileo did the experiments.

The universe in your head

Sara, Glendale, CA — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 14:53:56 GMT

This idea is Scientology. L. Ron Hubbard talked about this in the 1950s.

The universe in your head

Patricia, Austin, Texas — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 15:18:52 GMT

I admire Lanza for his bravery in writing this book. Many years ago, the body of work by Jane Roberts (the books of Seth) were published. In his book, Seth Speaks, Seth states:

"Each individual has access to intuitional knowledge and can gain glimpses of inner reality. The universe speaks to each of us in this regard. . . .Consciousness creates form. It is not the other way around. . . .It is only because you are so busily concerned with daily matters that you do not realize that there is a portion of you who knows that its own powers are far superior to those shown by the ordinary self."

The Yale University Library maintains a comprehensive archive documenting the work and life of Jane Roberts, including published writings, unpublished writings such as journals and personal papers, correspondence and audio recordings of various channeling sessions, including the Seth Material and other recordings. [Wikipedia]

Peace and Love to you all

The universe in your head

cambridge ma — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 15:20:37 GMT

this seems like kant again... only new in the correlation to quantum mechanics-

The universe in your head

Byron Johnson, Brooklyn, NY — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 15:36:25 GMT

George Berkeley wrote about this 300 years ago. "If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"

The universe in your head

rdefazio, Buena Park, CA — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 15:45:54 GMT

This whole argument is vaguely reminiscent of the first half of Rene Descartes' six discourses during which he says, "Cogito ego sum," or "I think therefore I am." His agenda was to establish the certainty of the existence of God and the trustworthiness of the senses.

Robert Lanza justifiably opens the door to a more candid evaluation of how much our inner wiring influences the conclusions we draw. Naturally, this would draw fire from those who lack a certain degree of introspection and reflexion on the limitations of being human and who simply assume that what we perceive is a reliable representation of external reality, and that is understandable.

I can recall a philosophy professor in college, who was confronted by a student writhing in the unhappy state of Cartesian anxiety over his own existence. The student said, full of emotion and worry, "Professor, do I exist?" The professor responded, "Who's asking?"

We do assume a certain trustworthiness of our senses in daily life. Without the assurance that our spoons are lifting something bearing gustatory pleasure to our lips we would all go mad at dinner. Without a dip in the pool on a hot summer's day, we would be rather miserable. Without the irrationality of professed love and consummated marriage, the human species would die off.

We are irrational in many ways, and the notion that such such a predispostion has no influence on what we observe in scientific endeavors certainly is like swimming against the tide.

The universe in your head

John, St. Louis, MO — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 16:23:01 GMT

The human equivalent of a dog chasing its tail.....

The universe in your head

RH, Staunton, VA — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 16:31:38 GMT

I don't understand how if this is true we are ever surprised by the outcome of experiments. If what we perceive as the universe is the universe than how come there was no cosmological constant for Einstein’s beautiful static universe and why would we be surprised by a replicable study in quantum mechanics that shows that particles can be present in more than one place at a time and change from matter to "waves" of energy? Why wouldn't these types of studies come to be what we expect of them and not something entirely new and difficult to explain?

The universe in your head

IP3 — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 16:39:55 GMT

There was never an endeavor to create "life" a byproduct of the formation of the cosmos. Life is the bastard child of these events. Humanity is destined to destroy itself. Even those that "know" alittle something know nothing. Im a scientist but not an atheist, i dont subscribe mans place to gods will but rather evolution in tune with nature. Lets not forget that life is a fluke & commercialism most assuredly not its drive. Everything you see or "interpret" to see was not here after you it was all here before you. Blue was always blue before humans, reds always red. Mans ego his attempt to either raise god or floor god man wants to be god. In owing to that mans Ego his id will always stop the rest of humanity from progressive movement. YOU DONT CREATE COSMOS YOU ANT IT CREATES YOU. We are made of stuff of stars stuff of stars is not made from us. We are hairless apes who left the trees and kept using tools, better tools replacing the last ones, better people coming after making better tools take the human/god ego out of the mix and you have give & take, life & death. For all mans wealth education status possesions we are nothing more than hairless complex thinking apes who only understand our language and assume it divine. Can we talk with our water cousins whales etc? ... no
so for all we know they already unlocked the secrets to it all and sing it but all we hear is clicks and assume we know better we wil always assume we know better. Simplest terms our sun doesnt have to fear us but we have to fear it why fear the sun if we created it?

The universe in your head

D Douglas, Fisher,IL — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 16:48:36 GMT

This is nothing more than our observance of a universe created by a post-human civilization's simulation...
http://www.simulation-argument.com/

The universe in your head

Harry H, Missouri — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 16:51:59 GMT

OK, then, if consciousness creates reality, it sure pays to have a positive outlook.

The universe in your head

Buddha Dude — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 16:58:27 GMT

This is Buddhism

The universe in your head

Liz A. — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 17:11:53 GMT

Buddhism has long taught that our consciousness created the cosmos...this book is not creating anything new; simply exposing Westerners to a very old theory. I will be disappointed if Lanza is credited with originating this theory.

The universe in your head

Robert Murdock, Alto, Texas — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 17:13:55 GMT

I have come to believe that there is this universe which is the so-called physical realm which is temporary and another universe which is permanent and is the spiritual realm.
The physical universe depends on the spiritual universe. The two universes mesh together separated by only the plank length. Our perception is from this universe and our consciousness is from the spiritual universe.
Maybe we are sensing the spiritual universe in dark energy and dark matter.
There is noway to get around the fact that God created the physical universe, you can argue with a sign-post but it will get you no where, you can deny till you die but it changes nothing.

The universe in your head

PARASHAR, VADODARA, GUJRAT, INDIA — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 17:18:32 GMT

science is coming closure to indian spirituality though slowly but surely and scientifically.
its a step towards the EVOLUTION OF CONSCIOUSNESS .
the very acceptance of presence of consciousness and a real controlling factor of life,is encouraging.

The universe in your head

Thomas Ashby — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:05:48 GMT

The essay certainly raises eyebrows. I think Star Wars played a lot on the living universe and "connectedness" idea as "the force". So it's not a new idea. However, Lanza really brings things to the table. It seems the question "what is consciousness?" will never be adequately answered.

How can a single celled amoeba be "conscious" of bits of food as it displays "intention" to engulf and digest it? There is fundamentally no difference between it and us when we sense food and eat. The actions are the same and meant for the same purpose.

This Alice in Wonderland approach to the universe is quite problematic. It's just too crazy to think or believe it's all a dream and things are whatever you make them to be.

If you are ever before a judge however, it's good to know that your defense can be, "your honor, alchohol only exists in your mind and so I was never over the limit and that machine the officer used only was created in line with laws that we only think exist!"

The universe in your head

littleoysters — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:07:32 GMT

now that we are all on the bandwagon, this will change things. e.g. in This uni. smoking is really, really good for you (an so on, what fun!) "what me worry".

The universe in your head

QuantumRevelation, TN — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:34:10 GMT

Ok guys, back away from the bong pipe. Are you really listening to what you are saying? Has mankind officially gone off the deep end? Do you really think an individual's consciousness creates reality? Get a grip. To the poster above who said that religion is a dead end for explaining reality, I say you have not thought deeply enough or else you would not have come to that conclusion. Let us suppose, for a moment, that an observer is required for reality, as posited by quantum theory. Let us also suppose, as many do, that it is true that the universe is infinite. Given these statements, we can reduce the argument to a simple syllogism: "If the universe exists infinitely, there must be an infinite, omniscient observer. The universe does exist and is infinite. Therefore an infinite, omniscient observer exists." A further syllogism can be drawn from this: "Only an infinite consciousness can omnisciently observe an infinite universe. Man is finite. Therefore man's consciousness cannot omnisciently observe the infinite universe." A third syllogism follows: "Only an infinite consciousness can sustain an infinite reality. Man is finite. Therefore, Man cannot sustain an infinite reality." Fourthly: "The cosmos is an infinite reality. Man is finite. Man cannot be the cause of the cosmos." This brings us to the final conclusion: "The cosmos is an infinite reality. God is infinite. Therefore, God is the cause of the cosmos." Given the above, if quantum theory reveals to us that an observer is required for reality, then an infinite reality requires an infinite observer. That, dear friends, points us to God. God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. He is the sustainer of all reality. Religion is, therefore, not a dead end, but rather the beginning to understanding all of reality. Science and religion are not on opposite ends of the spectrum. Rather, science is a tool that God has given to us so that we may be led to Him through deeper study of His creation.

The universe in your head

Keith H., North Mankato, MN — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:38:17 GMT

So, I take it, Carlos Castenada was right...?

The universe in your head

Stormie TK, Houston, TX — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:57:19 GMT

If what Lanza proposes is true, perhaps I can learn to use "the Force" after all.

Would the Higgs Boson be analogous to "Midichlorians"?

The universe in your head

Tony Rotz — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:58:30 GMT

God created the universe and all that's in it and our souls are a direct creation of ourselves by that same God, infinite in being. It's impossible for our finite minds to grasp that which is infinite, we can begin to grasp the material but not that which is not of nature, the spiritual, try to imagine Love as substance, as a being entirely different than we are yet that's what it is, in the realm of eternity and we have so little of it, him, her, both.

The universe in your head

Keith H., North Mankato, MN — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:59:30 GMT

Rakesh Sharma, zero IS a degree. Maybe only because we imbue it with that. There is no such thing as nothing, because to conceive of nothing is to give it existence. Existence may well be a sliding scale. Neither science nor religion like that very much. Can the box contain itself?

The universe in your head

Sharon Hill Canyon Country, Ca. — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:29:14 GMT

The first flaw in thinking is to believe that something can not come from nothing. The thought that something must come from something else is both true and false. The reality is, as I experienced it, was that only when one discovers complete nothingness, does everything becomes possible. We are limited by our dualistic perspective of reality, we can not have dark without light, existence without nonexistence, consciousness without unconsciousness, etc. If you move beyond this perspective you find a Unitarian perspective where all exists as One. Duality fades and possibilities become limitless. This is where you can not find separation. So consciousness can not be separate from life. One can not be separate from another. The observer can not be separate from that being observed as it is simply creating the object/thought, etc. and observing it at the same time.
The cause of duality is free will. We have a choice as to what we want to focus on. In our making a choice to focus on one thing we choose not to focus on others. This is an illusion free will causes. It also inhibits us from seeing all, at the same time.
In actuality all forms that are not operating out of free will are much closer to the source or oneness. We choose to see what we are not, so we can begin to search for what we are.
We are beginning to find consciousness in matter or inanimate objects. And it definitely exists there. But again the flaw is in thinking that inanimate matter has less consciousness than animated matter. The truth is that consciousness is consciousness, there are not varying degrees of it only varying perspectives of it. Everything exists to support everything else and by doing so, supports itself. So a chair is a chair because it is useful to the one observing the chair. In reality, inanimate objects have the ability to become whatever is needed in the moment (and I use the term moment lightly). It is our belief or perception that prevents it from changing. Just as it is our belief/perception in time and space that keeps time and space in place.
So I repeat that it is only when you strip away everything and delve deeply into the endless vastness of nothingness, do you begin to see that nothing is indeed the source of everything. Then you get a glimpse of the oneness that is ALL.
This is simply what I experienced/ perceived/observed during a near death experience. The irony is that in death one finds the source of life.
Thank you for allowing me to share my experience.

The universe in your head

Tom, IL — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:02:15 GMT

Its all crap, really. All this does not exist at all. Did it exist before you were born? Of course not! Prove it! How? By someone elses' word?? Hah! I and only I am the single sole thing that exists. And that goes for all of you as well! That is all that is provable. For anyone. The rest is all crap. Why worry about it anyway? It all goes away when you die.

The universe in your head

Scot Olson, Lombard, Illinois — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:05:19 GMT

Reality is very real. The Universe does not give a crap about our precious consciousness. All this quantum pseudo-science is just a pathetic attempt to find god, and give us hope for an after-life.

The universe in your head

Manuel Transmicion, Pavement Narrows, MN — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:08:58 GMT

Space might or might not be a “thing,” or a fundamental concept of reality. But consciousness is most definitely an emergent property, and not a thing in itself (res ipsa). So how can something that emerges from reality be more real than reality? You can’t just wave your arms about quantum effects and dark energy here, folks.

The authors “don't lay out a detailed road map showing how a "biocentric" view of the universe might affect the course of science...”

The reason for that is that it wouldn’t. You can’t noodle out physical reality by studying the mind. In fact, science so often goes against common sense---that is, what the mind comes up with---that many scientists say that the purpose of science is to show where the mind is wrong, that if common sense were correct, we wouldn’t need science.

I will admit one instance where biocentrism might be valuable. Suppose you consider Genesis, especially Genesis 2, to be an account of the creation of human consciousness, rather than an account of the creation of the physical world. For example, Adam (or, more probably, Eve) creates language by naming things; mankind discovers that his intellect can assess his instincts, and even overrule them.

The universe in your head

Paul, Baltimore, MD — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:44:03 GMT

We can only seek answers to the questions we know how to ask.

The universe in your head

Brian Butler — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:59:20 GMT

The guy's right. :) And taken to its logical conclusion:

Nothing exists but thought. Look around you. That's what thought "looks like". Matter is the belief that something other than thought exists. Note: matter is a belief (or thought). The brain, usually considered to be the originator of thought, is actually just another thought itself.

Everything can be explained if it is considered that the physical universe with all its particles, waves, dolphins, emotions and hopes is just thought.

Thought determines how matter appears, since matter is thought. If thought is helpful, harmless, fearless, pure, then matter, including body (in the thinker's universe) is going to be harmless, enjoyable, harmonious.

Watch your thought. And remember the adjective 'fearless'.

The universe in your head

JD, Seattle, WA — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:10:35 GMT

Perception is fascinating, but it can a bit frightening, especially when we believe it without question, since it tends strongly to favor misdirection and illusion over facts at inopportune times . . .

Science provides clues that are very helpful in making factual sense of perception--which is great--but in the same way that science provides clues, perception is very skilled in creating misdirection and illusion . . .

For example, what we perceive visually actually is a puzzle, the pieces of which are turned upside-down, colorized, and reassembled by a set of neurochemical processes which include a good bit of filling-in-the-blanks, which is something one discovers sooner or later--typically as part of formal training in science--and even when we know the facts, we continue to perceive visually the same way we did before we knew the facts, although perhaps with a tiny bit more disbelief . . .

If we have normal vision and are standing in the middle of a field of red roses on a bright sunny day, we have the very realistic perception that we actually are seeing a broad expanse of red roses, but the reality is that the human eye only perceives red in a small region, so just a fraction of the red roses we see are perceived as they are, with the greater number being arbitrarily colorized based on a set of presumptions, primary of which is that as we looked at different parts of the field of roses and saw only red roses, this maps to all the roses most likely being red all the time, which usually is a reasonable and accurate presumption, except when it is not, which might be a good presumption for roses but probably is not such a good presumption if one is in a field of octupi (because a lot of them can change colors nearly instantly) . . .

As a thought experiment, I think it is interesting to ponder what might happen if one were blindfolded and led to the middle of a field of roses on a bright sunny day; put inside a vertical box; and then after the blindfold was removed, was told to look straight ahead while a curtain at the front of the box slowly was opened . . .

Without having the ability to examine different parts of the field of roses as one sees it from afar and then walks toward it, I wonder how the roses seen by the parts of the eyes with no red receptors will be perceived, especially if the experiment begins with information about the field of roses which does not make the expectation that all the roses in the field are red so likely . . .

In other words, if someone you trusted told you that only 10 percent of the roses in the field are red and that all the other roses are yellow, how would you perceive the roses for which your eyes only see some combination of gray, blue, and green?

And if this appears to be a silly experiment, it might be a little bit less silly when one remembers the fact that both eyes have no visual receptors in the area where the optic nerves exit each eye, such that whatever you perceive in that part of the field of vision truly is an illusion, which is the fill-in-the-blanks aspect . . .

If one journeys back a century or so, another curious bit of information is that Sigmund Freud had the strange idea that people actually are luminescent egg-shaped beings traveling through spacetime, an idea which around fifty or so years ago appeared in some of the books Carlos Castañeda wrote about the adventures of Don Juan, where one might guess that Castañeda got the idea from Freud, or that Freud got the idea from the same source as Castañeda, but perhaps not . . .

On a related note, there is a self-trained amateur physicist (Peter Lynds) in New Zealand who thinks that time is continuous (no gaps or stops) rather than discrete, which if true tends to make most of modern physics a bit goofy, at best . . .

Another interesting bit of information is that when medical researchers do experiments with prototype drugs, there nearly always are cures within the group of patients who are given placebos, to the point that this phenomenon is given a special name, "the placebo effect" . . .

But perhaps more disturbing are the hoops through which medical researchers jump in their attempts to isolate the mind from the chemicals and processes they are testing, such that they have "double blind" tests where only a few people (or perhaps only a machine) actually know(s) which pills, tablets, creams, injections, or whatever are "real" and which ones are "placebos", all toward the goal of proving without doubt that a medicine or process is able to work in a way which truly is independent of the minds of the doctors, nurses, patients, and so forth and so on . . .

As another favorite thought exercise, I try to imagine various devices that could be sent far into outer space, where based on some type of possibly computerized machine, a capsule of penicillin could be dropped onto a petri dish in which some type of bacteria are growing for which penicillin is a bactericide or antibiotic . . .

Would the penicillin actually kill the bacteria if nobody is there to observe it?

How might one design a machine that would have no connection whatsoever, local or at a distance, with any human mind, and could not be influenced by the bacteria, either?

Is this just a variation of the Schrödinger's Cat experiment?

Is there a way to make it work differently so that it is not so quantum?

Intuitively, I think that penicillin and its affect on certain bacteria actually is both real and independent of human and bacterial observation, but proving it is another matter . . .

I like to ponder this stuff, especially late at night during full moon when I am wandering around the back yard in my underpants looking for magic mushrooms, because while it might appear to be a bit strange, the antigravity stuff is out there somewhere, and no matter how skilled it has been so far in keeping well hidden, eventually someone will have an epiphany, and then a lot more stuff will make sense and will appear to be just as obvious from the perspective of common sense and intuition as is the Earth being mostly round and traveling in an elliptical orbit around the Sun . . .

Basically, when you discover where all the antigravity is hiding, then there you are . . .

The universe in your head

Bennie Grezlik — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:15:04 GMT

Lanza's use of the terms for life and consciousness seem to be interchangeable. But was there not life before mind? How did this primitive life create, or project, the universe? Biocentrism is just a little to facile. A theory that explains everything explains nothing.

The universe in your head

Carl, Orange, CA — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:30:49 GMT

Interference could be responsible for everything we observe. Since phase cancelation exists on the quantum level, and the article is straddling the edge of objectivity, then perhaps the big ball of everything which preceded the big bang still exists behind some polarized veil and we continue to radiate away from it. Only when we lose our mass (die) can we glimpse the origin of everything as we travel back to that infinite light at the end the tunnel.

The universe in your head

Jennifer Lamar, Los Angeles, CA — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:49:15 GMT

The Emerald Tablet - circa 5000BC, last displayed to the public by Alexander the Great in Egypt 332BC, currently hidden in the Giza desert says:

Truly, without deceit, and most veritable.

That which is Below corresponds to that which is Above, and that which is Above corresponds to that which is Below to accomplish the miracles of the
One Thing.
And just as all things come from this One Thing,
through the meditation of One Mind, so do all created things originate from this One Thing through Transformation.
Its father is the Sun
Its mother the Moon
The Wind carries it in its belly.
Its nurse is the Earth.
It is the origin of all, the consecration of the Universe. Its inherent Strength is perfected if it is turned into Earth.

Separate the Earth from Heaven,
The Subtle from the Gross,
genly and with great ingenuity.
It rises from Earth to Heaven and descends again to Earth, thereby combining within it the powers of both the Above and Below.

Thus will you obtain the Glory of the Whole Universe.
All Obscurity will be clear to you.
This is the greatest Force of all powers, because it overcomes every Subtle thing and penetrates every Solid thing.

In this way was the Universe created.
From this will come many wonderous Applications,
because this is the Pattern.

Herein have I completely explained the Operation of the Sun.

The universe in your head

Allen Lopez, Louisville, KY — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:54:08 GMT

Another interesting take on these issues is the central theme in Blasphemy (novel) by Douglas Preston.

The universe in your head

Joe, Seattle, WA — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:16:50 GMT

What a bunch of claptrap.

So the Universe is "bio-centric", is it? Well what about the Universe before life came along? Certainly the Universe existed before life on Earth existed, before even our own Sun existed? Did these things not exist because we weren't there to observe them? Poppycock.

This is just another in a long line of people who think they have it all figured out, but actually are just spouting a bunch of recycled gobblygook. They don't know, I don't know, NOBODY knows how we got here or how the Universe got here, whether life has any meaning beyond what we give it, whether there's a higher power or a completely impersonal Universe... anybody who claims they know the answers to these things are wearing hats that don't fit on their heads (but it might fit on their egos).

The universe in your head

Peter Loewy, Eugene, Oregon — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:30:25 GMT

Huh? WTF? All I wanted to know was how much gun powder to load into this 9mm casing to make it shoot straight. Now I have to deal with creating the universe. [...]

The universe in your head

Vinicius, Brazil — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:36:18 GMT

It delights me to see how history of thinking changes and changes dramatically. Here I read an article on science theories that ressembles 19th century's metaphysics. Philosophy had been silenced for the certainty principle of science, so much more efficient and non-speculative -- but nowadays we see again how human intuition can be so precise sometimes.

And all that is written as bombastic new ideas. Perhaps just new ways of confirming an old, very old one.

The universe in your head

gnosisless, West Lafayette, IN — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:51:53 GMT

"Anyone who has had a precognitive dream has prima facie evidence of the primacy of consciousness over physical matter."

No. Anyone who has had an "precognitive dream" has prima facie evidence of the *perception* of precognition. Nothing more.

An bee dreaming of finding clover is not predicting the future. Likewise, a person who dreams of a phone call from a friend isn't, either.

We remember the hits and mostly forget the misses. It's an evolutionarily sound practice. It does, however, lead to some very silly ideas.

The universe in your head

hihu — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:21:03 GMT

great article

The universe in your head

Gabe, Fairfax, CA — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:37:46 GMT

Our scientific understanding of reality is all wrong. Scientists are aware of this already. But, you're wrong many times before you're right, and the scientific process is a systematic, organized approach to discern truth from falsehood that will someday wrench the truth from this vast mystery we're born into.

Nobody has the answer yet. Anyone who claims otherwise is in denial. Our brains may not even be capable of perceiving the designs of the universe. But, we must keep trying.

The universe in your head

David Bock,las vegas,Nv. — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:45:24 GMT

Ever heard of Seth?

The universe in your head

John F, Dayton, OH — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:48:01 GMT

Well if this is indeed true, kind makes us have to re-evaluate certain moral positions, like abortion, capital punishment, etc.

The universe in your head

Laurel, MD — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 00:06:11 GMT

A couple comments:
1) Is there a testable hypothesis in this?
2) If we--people--created the universe, then we might be the only intelligent life in it. Of course, one might wish to inquire where (or from Whom) our intelligence came.

The universe in your head

Kevin, Fort Lauderdale, Florida — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 00:06:22 GMT

I'm skeptical. Even I were to take the biocentric theory seriously, there are some problems with it that would need to be solved. This theory suggests that our reality is a construct of our minds. That the mere act of observing reality influences it on a quantum mechanical level. It seems to me that consciousness is an emergent property of sufficiently complex, information processing nervous systems. How would consciousness create all that we observe in our universe, our reality? What is the exact mechanism or mechanisms that would enable a conscious being to create the "Goldilocks" constants of our universe? What would be the nature of this reality creating consciousness that would enable it to influence it on the quantum mechanical level? Why would consciousness be needed to collapse the wave function? I can imagine that an unconscious device that does measurements of quantum mechanical phenomena would do the same thing. Is consciousness really a fundamental property of the universe? If so, how can that be demonstrated scientifically?

The universe in your head

Derek Rubin, Wellington, Florida — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 00:19:10 GMT

I can see where this theory holds ground. If we hadn't a brain, there'd be no perception, in essence nonexistence of the universe. Our conciousness really is what forms it all together. I find this view of the universe rather satisfying, the world and everything around us is really what we make it. If you think deeply into it, you'll find it rather self-empowering. The universe really is just the mass conciousness of every living being put together.

This kind of disputes Immanuel Kant's thing in itself theory. He stated that there is our perception of an object, and another independent existence of the object, it's true nature, what it really is. Isn't what it really is what we make it out to be? Can we prove any other existence than what we can perceive? Perhaps existence is entirely our perception. Interesting stuff.

The universe in your head

peter j pilot gainesville, florida — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 03:22:06 GMT

Read..The Starlight Technique...it's free, on-line, written 12 years ago..complete with clear instruction on how to do the technique and evolve your consciousness consciously. www.starlighttechnique.com go to the bottom of page below picture and click on The Book...takes a moment to load..it's in adobe acrobat pdf... Again, the book is free, so the information is available to everyone including those who are financially challenged. Enjoy your journey.

The universe in your head

Byron Raum, Beverly Hills, CA — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 04:18:36 GMT

It is truly amazing how one can write an entire book from misunderstanding one simple principle. When scientists talk about the "observer", all that that really means is that there is a logically consistent viewpoint of the universe. Quantum physics just tells us that we have a choice of viewpoints, for example, the standard example that we can measure either the speed or position of a particle.

An observer can take a pick of viewpoints, but that doesn't mean that any other viewpoint is any less valid. More importantly, no viewpoint needs an observer to be valid. That's all there is to it.

Furthermore, the author cites a number of unsolved problems in our current understanding of physics. Aside from a lot of flowery language in describing these, there's nothing. The reason why I have a problem with this is that his logic would can apply at any time in history to any level that physics was at. He's not presenting any solution to the particular issues that scientists are working on. If we are to accept his arguments, we can dismiss the entire science of physics. This is rampant nonsense.

The universe in your head

Thomas Ashby — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 04:57:47 GMT

I think, therefore I ain't?? heh?

Anyway, isn't the way we perceive the world learned?
Aren't we taught and conditioned to think and perceive? I suppose it's been done that monkeys raised from birth to death in complete isolation pretty much end up insane. Which begs the question, do they perceive their immediate world? I would bet that they act nothing like normally raised monkeys.

I can't imagine what a human would end up like raised in total isolation and taught nothing.

The universe in your head

John F Dayton, Ohio — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:32:16 GMT

A question for the avowed atheists among us, has consciousness always existed? If so, kind of deflates the atheism position doesn't it?

The universe in your head

Dr. Dan H. — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 11:38:47 GMT

It is surprising and disappointing that someone who calls himself a scientist engages in mere metaphysical speculation. A claim, no matter how comforting it is to us emotionally, is simply a claim. Anyone can make a speculative claim about consciousness. There's nothing special about that. Where's the evidence to support that claim? Where's the proof? Most of us love this kind of speculation because we can make it support our preconceptions and emotionally-comforting superstitions. But that's not science, and it's certainly not legitimate philosophy. This book tells us more about Dr. Lanza's own inner psychological world and imaginary conceptions than it does about any objective description of the universe.

The universe in your head

Nkosinathi Kohen Nyathi — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:20:02 GMT

Maybe I am commenting a bit too prematurely on the subject but its all so very interesting. Most interesting is how so many people and / or cultures just love to put their stamp on stuff and claim things that just maybe un-claimable. My paranoia for such, perhaps comes from the fact that I come from a region of the world (Southern Africa) where we have had our fair share of people claiming our land, produce and even culture, which has subsequently lead to what appears to the so-called logical mind a state of deliberately induced insanity to benefit a greedy few.
So with all due respect I don't think the suffering that we have endured from centuries of plunder and pollution in our region by foreign invaders was born from a figment our imagination. And therefore because of that moment of imagination whose mindset would have been “we must be oppressed for so long” was indeed the reason why we were then oppressed for such a protracted length.
So I agree that if I wished gravity away or imagined it not to be, I should then be able to fly and cruise through the universe at light speed and faster.
If I cannot see the sea has it suddenly abandoned me? And if I cannot feel the rays of the sun does this mean the moon shall never shine again? If everything is relative, I think so is relativity itself.
Faith and belief the 2 main ingredients of formalised religion today, suffer the same Achilles tendon as science. Religion tells you to “just believe” which in effect is faith based and hence the saying “blind faith” and no proof is required to establish facts. On the other hand science will rigorously rely on proof and evidence and based only on that make some sweeping claims. Both suffer the Achilles tendon of claiming that which may or may not necessarily be totally true or false for that matter.
Scientifics or scientific observation at least gives one a chance to stand and observe first, whereas religion goes boldly out and will claim, without a shred of evidence which I think is quite abominable to be honest. In collusion we have as part of the centre of our culture, something called “Hubuntu”, Humanness if you will. Its stanza is “people are people because and by other people”. When applied to western articulation this might be seen as the law of human relativity.
In our culture “Bantu” from Hubuntu the universe is seen in exactly the same way. The stars, moon earth, sun, galaxies and whatever else is all connected and interconnected for what seems an infinite eternity we call Yah / MoYah in English, Existence. So if there ever was an Achilles tendon to our culture, it was probably that, because we don’t claim it or force any one else to, as so many others do. It is simply our observation and we wish to harm no one with it or by it.
Shalom le kul

The universe in your head

Mike Roberts, Shreveport, LA — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:24:18 GMT

My first thought after [or during] reading of Lanza's synopsis online [this site] was the word Bullsh*t! Then I thought deeper, and realized that he hasn't the foggiest idea about reality or physical science. Then I thought, "is this a joke?" Then I thought, maybe it is a backdoor attempt by creationists in their longtime quest to undermine science. At no time did I think he was describing reality. At the most superficial levels, of course our senses color what we see or feel, and of course our brains [however they work] affect our understanding of the universe around us. All of his points are old and have already been countered by physical scientists. Some of his statements are just silly. I was hoping for better when I saw the title. He clearly does not understand what scientific proof involves, given several of his statements.

The universe in your head

Kyle — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:05:18 GMT

I think you are all taking what he is saying, as anthropocentrism. Not biocentrism.
EG....as soon as humans came into existence so did the universe.
But its BIOcentrism he is talking about.
Meaning any conscious biological being brings "stableness" to the quantum reality.
ALL the beings in the universe are "holding it together" per se. Collectively.
Not just us humans.
Thus more feasible.

But I agree, if he were just talking about only humans, then this would be absolute nonsense.
But as it stands, counting ALL conscious beings across the universe. Its not so hard to fathom.

The universe in your head

Rich S. — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:09:30 GMT

If conciousness gives rise to the universe and will is the means by which that conciousness acts on the universe then I will myself rich!!! d;b Oh, I am Rich.

The universe in your head

rs, New Orleans, LA — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:14:17 GMT

Humans are NOT RATIONAL BEINGS; We are RATIONALIZING BEINGS!

The universe in your head

Rick S., New Orleans, LA — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:20:51 GMT

Re: Byron Raum, Beverly Hills, CA:
You are incorrect. By the act of observing we affect/effect the outcome of the measurement. For example the double slit experiment; we can close off one of the holes and get the particle-like result for the photons for one hole, or we can make measurements to determine which hole the photons go through and get a double bump, the result of particles going through two holes. Or we can not measure and get the interference pattern for waves. One measurement determines that the photons are particles, the other determines the photons are waves. They can't be both after observation only before. This is the duality and the measurement/observation collapses the wave function into one (and only one) result.

The universe in your head

Ron Cook — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:35:34 GMT

I am the message bearer from Timelessness to Time and through the Portal (Goge) in Space / Time to you for whom playing with illusion is a preoccupation, rather than a means to union with the One and Absolute. To these means of transfer, I am deeply dimensional in meaning and serious of mentality. These communications are not illusory. What you are about to receive, you must know whereby you even think — a level that speaks in dim remembrances. This knowledge speaks to you even now as decisions are made sometimes, by you collectively, in stark rebellion. Remember who and what you are. Be concerned, for it is a mission that must be revived from your deepest senses and memories, from a time when physical (virtual) Time was not. These physical realms must be not forgotten in your present form, they must be used as a means to reclaim your Reason!

Words are not your / our only means of communication, we do not speak in a sound related methodology when we are together in coherency. Your dreams know the secret of such interfacing. Ours is passed directly to the mentality of the audience who interlaces the projection within Time and Space. Omegons such as I and the initiates such as you, are carriers of this inherent Truth and should speak only messages that convey the same sincerity of being. Hard will it be, that I somehow must pass on to you who have failed to remember, yet the continuation of wisdom in this Goge Sector is necessary whereby paths are retraced to limitlessness (home).

First, let be known to you, that the data added here to the survey of my relation, known as Claronu (whose name has meaning), is not in any way to interfere with the data he collected. It, and mine, are to serve as your device of memory magnification. His record has been corroborated, by localizations in Timelessness, to be factual and totally complete. Its secret is yours to know, and it is indeed who you are.

The destruction expressed by the Leche, destroyed the Enmayi planet (your old home world) in total. Its ada-son, source of deep space light, called Egog was reduced to its chemical basics by the force of the gargantuan discharge. It is now the fifth planet from Goge as yours once was. As Egog’s fire was snuffed out, so were the lives that resided near its Light giving exchange of broadcasting virtual data for you to utilize in this school of learning. The fourth planet, my virtual home world in this illusion, was rendered atmospherically dead by a rain of Enmayi asteroids; leveled were our civilization’s offerings-in-being to the All. Our hydros resources were lost to the cold of space — though we needed them not to exist, rather to serve esthetic purposes. Most of my relations were converted into the realm of limitless pursuits in the reality of being. Their initiations are now complete at this level.

Few of us escaped, as did your relations (virtually you) who arrived on this Gardened Planet over four million orbits ago. We, Omegons, were here to greet you and help you to build great civilizations in the glorious Valley Regions. There your civilizations survived numerous catastrophes with us for this world dies and reawakens periodically. The Valley Region was highly protective for millions of orbits. It was the most beautiful and sheltered of all areas upon this place of moving landscapes. As your offspring (virtually you) became genetically developed for this atmosphere you ventured out to explore the surface of a world saturated in hydros. During periods of destruction, your mentality, too strong in emotional passion and ignorance of the Alphian ways, destroyed (physically removed) almost all Omegons who helped you. However, we have survived (we do not die) in many places hidden to you, including Time and Space. It is our duty to enlighten you to return to your past glory, with us in our final initiation.

Most of us reside on a moon of the fourth planet, where the churning blast of your weapon, did not touch us. There, we intercepted the jettisoned craft with Claronu’s Enmayi survey intact. Those few of us who survived have returned periodically to our old world and live under its surface. A few hundred of your relatives had earlier made it to the Garden Planet, prior to the accidental ignition of the Leche, on exploration teams sent by Koan and Planca. They had apparently figured on making it a colony of the Enmayi. The resources of the third planet for an Alphian being’s existence are ideal. Claronu was not aware of this happening though scepter’s records show he could have been before transcendence. We have attached this data along with the survey for your use at the time of humanity’s arrival at Omegon initiation to soulular finality and growth. To some of us it is known, that this is the strategy of the One and All for this sector’s total development. It is the Crux of Being.

The universe in your head

Nancy P. Calif. — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:41:06 GMT

To Harry H. in Missouri- Your comment makes the most sense to me-the rest of the comments are more like opinions or criticisms of Mr. Lanza's viewpoint, but yours is the product of thinking with his viewpoint. Even if Mr. Lanza is right or wrong, no one can go wrong with staying positve!

The universe in your head

Andrea Skye, Cushing, Oklahoma — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 18:29:21 GMT

is it really that there's nothing outside our heads, or that we're frustrated we haven't found any way to get out of them to see what is (or isn't, or might be) out there on its own. maybe, if consciousness is so vital to reality (re. several comments above) we are the product of some other's thought. Back to Buddhism, Tao, mysticism, and the circle goes on, and on,....

The universe in your head

Manuel Transmicion, Pavement Narrows, MN — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 00:20:21 GMT

The universe in your head

Paul J.S. Beaubien Victoria B.C. Canada — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 08:09:11 GMT

Consciousness is the energy that is furthest from yet connected to material form,,it,consciousness,is the energy connected upwards from one and two and three and fourth dimensions...that remains connected to and furthest from material so as to protect itself from at times negative material interactions;there is God

The universe in your head

Michael Modelle — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 13:01:26 GMT

If our conscious minds create our universe, how is it when we go to sleep and turn off our conscious minds we do not dematerialize along with the rest of our mind-created understandings?

The universe in your head

Mike Scirocco, Santa Cruz, CA — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:11:10 GMT

If an individual has the power to affect the external world by their mental power of visualization, but they want to manifest something that most of the rest of the world says is not possible - not allowed in their shared reality, is there a conflict, and does it take an extremely powerful mind to manifest it in spite of the opposing beliefs, does it create another universe, or other? I'd like to hear the author discuss this.

Also, if there is an active Intelligence underlying or permeating or overseeing all of this, as I suspect there is, and It does not want us to manifest something, that might introduce some anomalies.

The universe in your head

Hemang Vyas — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 17:02:51 GMT

there is a tendency in the west to copy the Hindu religious teachings and give the results their name and take credit for t. Bhagavat Gita has been misused in this manner a number of times...I wish some day the Supreme Hindu Teaching of creator and creation would dawn upon such Scholars of the West and alas it would have been too late...for them...some of the narrations in this article is common knowledge of a street child here in Hindustan....wish and pray some day you guys are bestowed with the true knowledge that give you total freedom and internal bliss....to have fear of some deep knowledge and their way of life and try to propagate wisdom/ that suits you is nothing but hypocracy....and you have exeperienced and seen the consiquances of this attitude in the West, that of taking credit for the Spiritual Teachings of other faith and even attempting to Register Patents...for commercial exploitations...

The universe in your head

John Walker, Manistee, MI — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 13:51:14 GMT

While I was eager to dig into this book, the authors' derisive tone towards scientific inquiry, lame comparisons, incoherent explanations and clunky syntax served only to make me grateful to msnbc for posting this excerpt. Thanks, msnbc, for saving me $29.95. I'd have been equally grateful had the excerpt compelled me to purchase the book, but I'm going to pass.

The universe in your head

Peter Howard — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 00:25:14 GMT

A bit deep but very refreshing. I found the authors' arguments persuasive and eloquently intuitive. Thanks for posting this.

The universe in your head

Tom Moore, Crofton MD — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:22:32 GMT

"the observer plays a huge role in how reality is observed"

Doh! Who knew!?

The universe in your head

dan — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 03:55:51 GMT

GUYS< YOU'RE MAKING TOO MUCH OF IT!!

Sorry. Look here, GRASSHOPPER, Since you were a tyke, people told you how to look at the world.
When I was Young, only people who wanted trouble hang out with black people. God made the heavens, and the earth, 2+2 are 4, and so forth.

When we study a phenomenon of any type, we use the words we choose to define the problem, isolate variables, and attempt to explain failure or success.

Once it is accepted to work the way we describe, then EVERYONE LOOKS AT IT THAT WAY.

If my spectrum analyzer sees two hydrogens for every oxygen, i have water!! We are not much smarter than that. We call someone who is a genius!!

The universe in your head

CLC King — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 19:08:31 GMT

"Our consciousness plays a key role in how we perceive space and
time, biomedical researcher Robert Lanza says in "Biocentrism."

He's right of course, but could have phrased it better: viz:- Our consciousness plays a key role in how (MUCH) we perceive (OF) space and
time, biomedical researcher Robert Lanza says in "Biocentrism." I hope he also makes it clear that the word "perceive" has to be expanded to mean, more broadly,(EXPERIENCE). It's all in the math, as I hope to demonstrate sometime within the next decade.

The universe in your head

Nicole, Andover, Kan. — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 18:33:10 GMT

I haven't read the book yet, but I think a lot of people are misreading the basic point, which is: Anything we observe about the universe is never going to be OBJECTIVE truth. Because everything we learn is subjective. It is filtered through our perspective as human beings. Even the tools we build to observe the universe are created within the limitations of our human brain bias. We simply cannot be flies on the walls of the universe. We are inextricably PART of the universe, and only capable of observing through our own consciousness.

Our concepts of time, space, matter and life itself are BIASED. We can never escape that bias. It goes back to the story of the blind men and the elephant. Each man believed that he was making an objective observation, but he was only "observing" one part of the elephant. And greatly missing out on the WHOLE truth.

I don't think that we CREATE the universe, so much as we fail to SEE or observe much of the universe. Hence, we are limited. What if there are dimensions beyond sight, beyond sound, beyond energy, but we cannot comprehend them? And what if they were JUST as important as everything we knew?

There's a quote I saw a long time ago about how people who were born deaf, and had limited vocabulary were greatly disadvantaged in learning complexity: "The limits of my language, are the limits of my world."

I think this applies to humans as a whole: "The limits of my consciousness are the limits of my universe."

The universe in your head

Karen, Chicago, IL — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 04:37:24 GMT

God's got our backs so no worries. Ask and you'll receive. Just believe and thank God.
Blessed be to all.

The universe in your head

Matthew Ota Lebanon NH — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 17:12:27 GMT

I think it is a form of the philosophy of idealism. It is not science.