Many scientists still refuse to acknowledge laboratory research on psi capacities, because it is at odds with classical physics. Yet the phenomena involved in psi, such as retrocausality and nonlocal correlations, are bedrock processes for quantum scientists. In terms of scientific proof, precognition is the least questionable phenomenon. In a typical psi experiment, the lab first creates a pool of images (or target pool). In telepathy experiments, an image is chosen randomly out of the pool by a computer (through a sophisticated random number generator) and is automatically displayed on the sender’s screen. The sender then proceeds to mentally send this image (called the target) to the receiver (or subject). The receiver (after a relaxation period) then describes aloud any and every image that passes through his or her mind, and all he or she says is recorded; at the end, four randomly selected images (one of which is the target) are displayed on the receiver’s screen, and he or she has to choose the target. At the end of an experiment, the statistics of hits and misses from all subjects are calculated.
In PRL, sometimes the descriptions were so precise that a subject, for example, would describe a tiger or cheetah running, while the target showed exactly that. The protocol is called double-blind because both the subject (receiver) and the experimenter don’t know the target. Nevertheless, the skeptics will try to argue that subtle cues could have been given to the subject; that is, they will invoke fraud and leaks in the lab to explain the positive results. In contrast, precognition experiments (perceiving a future target) do not allow the skeptics to invoke information leaks to the subject (whatever the manner), because the target is randomly selected only after the subject has described what he thought was the target. So that during the experimentation per se, nobody and not even a computer possesses the information (this is called triple blind). This is why researchers consider precognition as the least questionable psi capacity: whenever an experiment obtains positive results, it can’t be easily explained away. In precognition, it seems the mind can access a future time in great detail, as if the mind either annuls space or travels along a reverse time axis, from the future toward the present. This amounts to a kind of tinkering with time. As for clairvoyance (acquiring information about distant events without the medium of the physical senses or technology), it shows a clear-cut tinkering with space. While the space-time dimension of the physics of Newton (and the electromagnetic, or EM, spectrum) clearly fails to support psi, quantum physics, on the contrary, has laid the ground for its theoretical possibility, at least in terms of space and time singularities. Processes such as particles moving from the future to the past, or a particle being informed about the state of another one at a distance through “nonlocal correlations” (also called entanglement) are central in quantum physics. These processes can account for precognition (information from the future) and telepathy (information between two systems). Because a particle has a statistical probability to be anywhere in the universe, quantum physics could account for space anomalies (and psi researchers have thus proposed several theories of psi based on quantum physics). Yet, the great pitfall is meaning. Quantum events are purely indeterministic, and despite the fact that quantum physics posits nonlocal processes, in no way can it explain how such nonlocal processes could be directed according to the intention or the will of a person—that is, it would be responding to a deep and meaningful psychological process. (At the very moment when I finished typing responding, following the text I had written a month and a half ago, a strange psi phenomenon occurred, which we will analyze in another post.*)
Quantum events follow statistical rules; they are perfectly indeterministic. In such a framework, meaning—what makes sense for an individual (mind-body-psyche)—cannot be accounted for, because meaning is the absolute antithesis to randomness and indetermination. If, as quantum physics shows, the influence of consciousness on the physical world can be neither ignored nor evaluated within the quantum physics framework, then in order for a theory of the universe to be complete, it must include a theory of consciousness. Therefore, we are in need of a global theory that would account not only for the organization of matter at a deep level, but also for consciousness and its most important feat: the constant creation of new meaning—creativity, invention, psi capacities, understanding and learning, and the constant transformation of our intellectual and artistic life. Bearing this in mind, I elaborated Semantic Fields Theory (SFT) and hoped to achieved a framework that would fill the gap.
* See label 17 ‘Synchronicity, psi’ : An outstanding synchronicity + PK
(Read more on this subject in The Sacred Network, chapter 13.)