Now we live in a virtual reality.
This physical universe we call our physical universe, I guess that's
our name for it, a physical universe.
It's a virtual reality.
It's information.
Remember, consciousness gets information and takes that information and interprets
a reality from that information it gets.
My guest today is Tom Campbell, a physicist, a lecturer author of the
only nonfiction trilogy that I've ever read called My Big Toe, and I
believe a granddad many times over.
Tom, welcome and thanks so much for coming on the show.
Thank you, Rod.
It's my pleasure to be here.
I was in Australia, what, 2017, I think, something like that, and didn't spend as
much time there as I would have liked to.
Didn't get to see much, just went in, did my thing, and we toured around just
a little bit in the Auckland area, and then we had to go to the next stop.
So I'd like to get back.
Yeah.
It's a bit of a trek from where you are in the States, but
it's definitely worth coming.
So it's getting up to, we get, we're just about to get into spring.
So it's, the weather's starting to warm up a bit now.
All right.
So I read my big toe a, I think it was a few years ago.
I think this is the 20th anniversary for my big toes.
And it was written
It is.
Yeah.
And I've actually started rereading it cause when you read books, they gradually
fade from memory, but it really did start a whole exploration of things that
were paranormal, but just starting to question reality and it was a really
a big leap in providing some sort of tools and a framework to understand
consciousness that I'd never had before.
That was my introduction to who you were and I've been following
your work ever since, so I'm really happy to have you on the show.
So I'd like to start with a little bit of background about your life that
led to you becoming interested in, let's say, non physical reality and
developing a theory of everything and, if in hindsight, did you have any other
earlier childhood experiences that might have been indicated that there would be
more to come later in your adult life?
Yes, I came into this world very much a right brain child.
Very intuitive.
I was my sister's bane and on long trips because long trips in a car,
you know how it is with kids, 10 minutes, they say, are we there yet?
And it gets boring sitting in a car.
On long trips, I would just chant and meditate and when my parents finally
got there, 5 or 6 hours later, it's oh, I'd just gotten in the car.
I didn't notice that any time had passed.
So that was the kind of kid I was, 4 and 5 years old, 6 years old.
So I was very right brain coming in, but I knew I had very definite push
that I needed to be left brained.
I needed to learn how to do logic, learn how to make sense of things.
I was always had a pressure to go that direction.
In school, I struggled with things like math because they just didn't come
naturally to me, but I eventually overcame that struggle, and eventually I got to
the point where math was easy, and I struggled with physics, but I got to a
point where that was pretty easy too.
I went on for graduate degrees.
And became a physicist and sometime in around year seven, seven years old, I'd
had lots of experiences in out of body.
I had some entities come and teach me how to go out of body and take me, get me out
of body and then let me go play with it.
And then there were other lessons to learn.
So I went through all of that, but somewhere.
around seven and eight, I guess more like eight.
I was told that I had to quit.
Couldn't do that anymore because it wouldn't be good
for me to grow up weird.
I needed to grow up and be pretty much like everybody else because
in our culture, when you're weird, they do not nice things to you.
So that was my right brain ended there, and not so much in the way
I thought, but in so much as the, the going out of body all stopped.
All the paranormal things pretty much stopped there, except I always had
a link with nonphysical beings who would answer my questions and point
out things and, teach me things.
So that was always there.
And of course, I had no idea that it wasn't always there for everybody.
I didn't know that, and I didn't actually call it anything.
I didn't have a name for it.
There were just these presence, and if I got in a jam of some sort, I
could always ask them, and they would give me some very helpful answers.
So I trusted them implicitly.
And let's see.
I got to college, majored in physics, went to graduate school.
While I was in graduate school, I learned how to meditate, not because
I thought meditation was, it's such a neat idea, but because the ad for
meditation said that if you learn to meditate, you could get by on less sleep.
And I was in graduate school and working on a big Van de Graaff accelerator.
And when that machine was working, you stayed with it as
long as you were taking data.
Which means you might have to stay up for two or three days
in a row without sleeping.
Because your machine was taking data and you don't say let's turn
it off and come back in the morning.
It doesn't work like that.
If you turned it off, there's about a 50, 50 chance that it wouldn't turn on in the
morning, and that would be the end of it.
Your experiment was over.
In any case, I learned to meditate.
And shortly after learning to meditate, I just found out because I'm curious and
I tried that I could debug my software.
All the software that I was using to do the physics that had to do
with the experiments I was doing.
I could debug that software in my mind.
And that was a huge breakthrough because this is the bad old days of punch
cards, and debugging software was hard.
There weren't any debuggers.
The computer didn't give you any hints why your job didn't run, other
than, sorry, your job didn't run.
That's it.
And it wasn't only errors that I made, but key punchers themselves would sometimes
punch a hole just slightly off center, and the card reader wouldn't read it.
So there were those kinds of errors as well.
And I could find them in my mind, just by mental effort.
Oh, such and such a card has a problem.
And I'd look at it and say well, I don't see any problem.
And it turned out there'd be a...
key punch hole error in that, on that card.
So it wasn't that it was coming out of my subconscious that somehow I really knew I
had made a mistake on those lines of code and I was just getting it out of my mind.
I knew that this was something beyond the physical and here I am a
physicist and to my mind if you can't measure It either isn't real or it
isn't important, that's called an operational definition of reality.
And by measure it I mean if you can't interact with it.
If it isn't something that you can interact with not necessarily physically
but with your tools, you know with your beams and Microscopes or telescopes that
you can't interact with it in any way then it's it doesn't necessarily exist.
And if it does, it's not relevant because you can't interact with it.
That's the way physicists mostly see the world.
And that leads to thinking all the things that are subjective are
all just things imagined in mind.
There isn't any real substance to them because you can't measure them.
Therefore, they don't really exist.
That's not a very satisfactory attitude, but as a physicist, I never noticed that
wasn't a very satisfactory attitude.
It seemed like that was all right.
So anyway this thing with being able to debug software was like
a, big swift kick in the pants in the sense that I'm a physicist.
What I do is model reality, and there was a whole nother part of reality
that I didn't know anything about.
But I knew it existed and I knew it was real because I didn't doubt my experience.
It's not like I did this once and could have been a dream.
I did this.
I debugged, day after day, month after month.
And this worked fine for me.
So it was just a tool I had that was not explainable by the physical in any way.
So that's my early experience that led me here.
Then eventually I get out of graduate school.
I go to work.
And I run into Bob Monroe, that's a longer story.
We can go there if you like, but I run into Bob Monroe and Bob had maybe some,
all your listeners don't know Bob Monroe.
He wrote books, Journeys Out of the Body, Far Journeys, and Ultimate Journey.
It was about his out of body experiences.
And when I met him, I wanted to know, is this guy just
making this stuff up or what?
And it turned out he wasn't making any of it up, and he had built a laboratory.
It was just a building that was going to be a laboratory.
Didn't have anything in it, didn't have any equipment.
Had three isolation booths in it, and that's as far as he'd gotten.
He was looking for some scientists to help him set up and actually create
a laboratory to study consciousness.
Because he was, he had a mindset more like an engineer.
He wanted to understand what was happening to him.
He was wealthy, so he wasn't trying to sell books.
The income he got from books wasn't a half of 1% of his income.
That obviously had nothing to do with it.
I started working then with Bob in that laboratory for
about 15 to 20 hours a week.
Pretty much almost half time.
And I did that for probably six or seven years.
So that's a half time job for six or seven years, that's a lot of hours.
And my deal with Bob was that I would be a free scientist if he would be a
free teacher of how to go out of body.
Because I knew that if it wasn't my experience, then it couldn't be my truth.
It couldn't be something I really understood.
You have to experience things before you own them.
If you just read about it or hear about it or have somebody else tell you about
it, it's just not really entirely real.
When you do it, it's real.
So that was the deal.
And we'd go myself and Dennis Mennerich, an electrical engineer that I worked
with also met Bob the same time I did.
So we went out to see Bob like I say, for maybe six years or so, maybe a
little more and he taught us both how to go out of body and we wanted to
prove to ourselves that this wasn't just something we were making up.
So we only wanted to do things that were evidential.
Now, evidential means that you get, gather information that
you have no idea what it is.
You have no way of knowing what it will be.
But there is an answer, you can find out, you can look it up someplace.
That's evidential.
So we did a lot of remote viewing, we did healing, we did all the paranormal
things, just to see if it worked.
And if it worked, not just every once in a while randomly,
but what were the variables?
Why did it work?
Why did it work better sometimes than other times?
And being the physicist, I was in charge of figuring out theory,
understanding the theory of how it worked.
So that was where my mind was.
How does this work?
Why does it work?
What's the point?
And what I did is I started to do physics experiments while I was out of body.
And by that, what I mean is I do these paranormal things that were evidential.
And then I change a variable and do them again and see what effect did
that variable have on my ability to perform the paranormal thing.
And then I, do a different variable and all of that's very tedious work, but
most of science is very tedious work.
And, about 35 years later of doing these experiments, I thought
I understood consciousness.
And I wrote the books, My Big Toe, basically as a theory and
understanding of consciousness.
Of consciousness, and it was based on the facts I've learned about
consciousness from an out of body state, which is what makes me unique.
There's very few physicists in this world, if any, besides me,
who have that sort of facility.
In the larger consciousness system, out of body, I hate to say out
of body because you didn't get, you don't get out of your body.
That's just a, not a very good metaphor, but that's what everybody understands.
I use the term anyway, you're not in your body, but anyway, a physicist that
understands the physics and understands consciousness from the outside.
So that led me to eventually, after I published the books, a
few years after, to realize that I could derive a better physics.
A more general what more capable physics from consciousness.
Just take the things that consciousness said, the way this
is how the world needs to be.
This is how reality needs to be to support my facts of consciousness, that
I could take those facts of consciousness and actually derive quantum physics.
And derive relativity, first principles.
Now that's something that the physicists can't do.
Because relativity has this big unknown.
They don't know why the speed of light needs to be a constant.
That's a key thing.
Once you understand that c, speed of light, is a constant, then special
relativity is just a little algebra.
That's the main idea that makes relativity, is that c is a constant.
So I could understand that easily why c was a constant.
And with quantum physics, they get stuck on not being able to
comprehend why reality should be probabilistic, not material.
If you, in quantum physics, if you assume that things are material,
like if you assume an electron's a little chunk of mass with a charge,
you can't get any right answers because that's not what it is.
It doesn't work that way.
It's a protoparticle.
It's probability.
It doesn't actually exist until a measurement's made.
And then they have this thing they say in physics that the probability
wave function collapses when the measurement is made, and the probability
function becomes a physical particle.
That's nonsense.
How does a piece of mathematics, a probability,
turn into a physical particle?
Because you make the measurement.
So that's the big mystery underlying quantum physics, and why quantum
physics is referred to as weird physics, because it has this...
This weird aspect to it, and physicists have no clue what that means or how
that works or why it's that way.
And I can derive from first principles exactly why it has to
be that way from consciousness.
So then I started looking at a lot of other things that
were paradoxes in physics.
There's lots of paradoxes in physics.
And, some of those are very obvious.
Ask a physicist where time comes from.
And he won't know.
Ask him where mass comes from, and he won't know.
Ask him where space comes from, and he won't know.
All the basic things that physicists work with every day, and all of their
physics is based on these things, they have no idea where those things come from.
The physicists will just say well, they are because they are.
That's not science.
Yeah, that's a, not a good scientific answer.
And then there's other things like there's if you ever listen to a Rupert
Sheldrake's something like 10 problems with physics, it got yanked off of TED
Talks because it was pseudoscience.
It wasn't pseudoscience.
It was good science, and all 10 of those things are things that
are all paradoxes in physics.
Things that physics knows are there that way, but they don't
know why they're that way.
And one of them was the speed of light actually does change a little
bit from time to time, but only in, let's say, the ninth decimal place.
Just changes just a little tiny bit.
It's been recorded now like four times that it's changed.
And I can explain that very easily, why that happens.
And there are a set of constants.
We just call them cosmic constants because they're big picture constants.
And if any one of those constants changed, even in the ninth decimal place,
the whole universe would go unstable.
I think it's called the anthropic principle or something like that.
The idea is it looks like these constants we're all, what can we say all honed
to be what they are together, like they only work as a set, because if any one
of those constants, I think there's five of them, if any one of those
constants changed in the ninth decimal place, the universe would be unstable.
So it's real important that all those constants be exactly the
way they are out to nine decimal places to keep this place stable.
That looks like that was a plan.
What's the probability that happened randomly?
Oh, just randomly, they all were exactly what they needed to be to nine decimal
places, and of course, that's silly.
That doesn't happen randomly.
And I can explain exactly why that had to happen.
So on it goes.
There's lots of these paradoxes that exist and this model of mine of
physics answers them all very clearly.
And my model doesn't have any strange assumptions in it.
The only assumption really is consciousness exists, and I don't, after
that, I just derive logically, mostly deductively, what happens until I end
up with consciousness and how it works.
So anyhow, that's the real short over the top story of what it is I've done.
I guess one other thing I would add is that this model not only produced
a better physics, but it also produced an understanding, a scientific
explanation for the subjective world.
So now there's a science of the subjective as well as the science of the objective.
The science of the objective world we call physics.
Physics, chemistry, biology, those are all sciences of the objective world.
But this science of the subjective world tells us about us.
If you're unhappy and miserable, it'll tell you why.
What's the point?
What's missing?
And what you need to do to change that?
So it's the understanding the subjective experiences in our life, and of course,
from my viewpoint, opposite of a physicist viewpoint now is that it's the subjective
world is where all the importance is.
That's where all the meat of life is.
That's where, the objective world is just the stuff.
It's like the settings on the stage.
It's just the stuff, your house, your car, your clothes, your body,
that's all the physical stuff.
But the subjective world is where all the importance is.
It's about love and caring and sharing and friendliness and justice and all the
things, that make your life important.
Who do you marry?
How many children do you have?
These are all subjective decisions.
You can't make any of those objectively.
They're all subjective.
All of that is part of the subjective world.
And, in my mind, the subjective world is just a whole lot more meaningful and
significant than the objective world.
Who goes to a play to watch the the stage and all the props.
That's the objective stuff.
You go to a play, not to watch the props, you go to a play because of
what's going on in the minds of the actors and the characters they're playing
and the interactions between those characters and the story they tell.
And that's all subjective.
That's all subjective.
Okay, that's my one over the top, so everybody knows a little
bit of who Tom Campbell is.
He's a weird physicist who has written My Big Toe, and I have a website, and I
have about a thousand videos on YouTube, in case you're interested, but other
than that, I'm open for questions, Rod, whatever you'd like to ask.
Okay.
Well the first one was my understanding of consciousness is it's fundamental.
So everything springs from consciousness.
Could you give us like a, just for the lay person, your understanding
of what consciousness is?
Okay, I can define consciousness just very simply.
Consciousness is awareness with a choice.
That's what a four word definition.
Yeah.
So if we start from the beginning, so there was consciousness and it always
had awareness or then awareness became, and then choices started to be made, no?
When I start with consciousness exists, that's an assumption.
It already has awareness, but a very dim awareness.
You know how biologists, if you give them a living cell, they will derive
all the rest of the things that are on our planet that are living.
Just give them one living cell, and they will take that and show you
how that cell evolved into all the plants and animals and creatures
and things that are alive here.
Okay, it started with like single celled things, bacteria, and then they got more
complicated like amoebas and, amoebas have parts and so on and it evolved up
until finally, you get all the creatures we have there, including ourselves.
So a biologist can tell you that story, but he has to start with a cell.
He can't tell you where that first cell came from.
Now, he can do some hand waving and he can say if there were some right kind of amino
acids and the right sort of this and that, and a little bit of electricity like from
lightning or static electricity, ah, that might've started that, that first cell.
So the hand waving is a physics term for means it's not hard facts.
It's conjecture.
So they can wave their hands in the air and come up with some conjecture
of where that first cell came from.
And they can even duplicate it in their labs, get the right stuff together,
put a little spark through it.
And yeah, they get something that resembles a living cell that maybe they
could work with, so I'm the same way.
I start with the most minimal piece of consciousness, and that minimal
piece of consciousness then is a thing that is aware, but it's only
aware of the fact that it exists.
And it can be in state A or state B, because consciousness has a choice.
So if it was just in state A, then there wouldn't be any
choice for the consciousness.
So the minimalist thing for a consciousness is it has to be, it
can be between state A or state B.
And that's it.
And it can change from state A to B, state B to A, and that's all it is.
That's the, you can think of that as a a consciousness cell, if you like,
like instead of a biological cell.
And from there, I show logically how it would evolve, how it had to evolve.
And basically that evolutionary process takes that up through what it is today.
Which is, I call the larger consciousness system.
And we, you and I, and all the rest of the people, and dogs and cats
around here, are subsets of that.
We're pieces of that consciousness.
I call those individuated units of consciousness.
And that's what we are.
Consciousness is fundamental.
And it starts with consciousness.
Now, it might seem to some of your listeners that it's a logical flaw that
a start with just consciousness exists.
Okay, now just like the biologist, I can give a conjecture answer to
where that consciousness came from.
And some other people have come up with similar conjecture.
I've seen it at Stanford University, I believe it was in the philosophy
department and look up automata, cellular automata, and you'll find, I
don't know, probably a hundred pages of it, but you'll find one section of
it where they deal with consciousness.
There's hand waving conjecture that you can deal, but it's
not a failure to not know it.
Because the reason we can't know it is because we are pieces of consciousness.
We are consciousness and you can't know, you can't experience, you can't have
first hand knowledge of what it is that you are, what it is that created you.
Babies don't watch themselves being born.
It's just a process and later they grow up and say, oh, okay, I was born one,
you know, in the, in the past and they understand it and they realize it, but
it's not an experience necessarily that they have or one that they remember.
That's not a great example, but the thing is that if you are
consciousness, you can't get outside of consciousness to look back at
consciousness, with a objective view.
Hmm.
You know, You can't do it.
You're in it.
So you can't get outside of yourself to look back at it and
say, ah, okay, I can see now.
Oh, look, I see where it came from.
That has to be from a view that's outside of consciousness.
We can't get outside of consciousness because we are consciousness.
So therefore that where did it start?
It's not a fault that you don't know.
You logically can't know.
That's an unknowable.
The best you'll ever be able to do is wave your hands and come up with some
conjecture because we can't get outside of what we are in order to see how
that happened in order to get some idea of where that might have come from.
So that's not a flaw.
It's just a kind of a logical fact that we won't know that those biologists will
never know for sure where that first cell came from, unless they can get outside
of that experience and watch it happen.
See how that happened.
But there isn't any memory.
There aren't any written records.
There isn't any way for them to do that.
And so they'll never know for sure.
All they can do is come up with reasonable conjecture.
But it'll never be certain.
And it's the same with consciousness.
It'll never be certain exactly where that consciousness cell came from.
But let me have that one cell.
And that's not a huge assumption because we're conscious, you and I,
and all the people listening to this are conscious, we have consciousness.
So that consciousness exists is not a real bender as far as an assumption goes.
It's about as obvious assumption that as you can imagine.
So that's where I started from.
And the rest of this is just consciousness evolution.
And it's not a model that says well, consciousness could have evolved this way.
It's consciousness had to evolve this way.
So I don't go off into those little details that it could have done
this or could have done that.
I stay with the basics of what it had to do.
So the model is based on the way consciousness had to evolve.
Didn't have other choices.
This was its only path of evolution.
Now, with biology, that path of evolution is defined by an ability
to procreate and survive, right?
If you can't procreate and survive, eventually you'll disappear
from that evolutionary system.
Consciousness is to lower entropy.
And entropy is a science word, but it's not all that scary.
It's just a measure of disorder.
And I model consciousness as an information system.
Which makes sense.
What is it?
What are we conscious of?
We're conscious of the data that we collect with our five senses.
That's what we're conscious of.
That's the input data.
We take that data and we look at it and interpret it to be this reality.
So our reality is based on us interpreting data that we receive.
We get data, we do processing on that data and we say, oh, there's a fish,
there's a dog, there's a house, there's my mother, and we learn what all these
things are and what their names are.
But that's because we learn that from after we're born.
So we learn how to interpret the data.
So consciousness is an information system because it gets information and comes to
some kinds of conclusions and attitudes based on the information it gets.
Same as any information system.
So think of an information system where all the bits are random.
Now a bit is not really a science word.
It's just the definition of the smallest piece of information possible.
That's a bit.
So if you work information down to the smallest possible piece, that's a bit.
So let's say you have a system and all the bits are random.
If all the bits are random, there is no information.
They're all just random bits.
But if you take some of those bits and order them, which
lowers their entropy, right?
Entropy is a measure of disorder.
All random is highest disorder.
If you can order those bits, which lowers their entropy, then those
ordered bits can mean something.
You can give them, they could be a symbol of something.
It could be the, a number.
It could be the number two.
This way and that way, state A and state B.
It could stand for things, but you have to make order.
There's no information until you order the bits.
Entropy is a measure.
How entropy gets lowered is a measure of how consciousness evolves.
Consciousness isn't about survival and procreation.
Consciousness is about lowering entropy.
That's its motivator to evolve.
So it makes maybe a pattern with those bits, and then maybe it
makes patterns of patterns, or all kinds of different patterns.
And then eventually it takes two of those bits and just lets them
oscillate, A, B, A, B, A, B, 0.
And when it does that, it's created a metronome.
Now it has regular time.
And if it has regular time, it can also create sequences of patterns of sequences.
As much complication as it can.
So as the things get more ordered, they get more complex.
They get more useful because all those things can...
And one of the very first things it would learn would be arithmetic,
would be quantity, because each little piece of ordered bits is a
thing, and then here's another thing.
Oh, one thing plus another thing is two things.
And the simple concepts of logic of quantity, which is what math is,
it's just the logic of quantity.
That would be one of the first things that it would understand.
So it would be natural for it to develop a sense of mathematics
and quantity, and number.
Okay, so in any case, that's what drives consciousness.
So I can show that the system would go through a series of lowering
entropy quickly, and then not so much a plateau where it's stuck.
It's still lowering entropy, it's just not as quickly as it had before.
And then it comes up with another invention.
Ah, like time.
Time was an invention.
Okay, now it can do sequences.
So it starts to have more novel things that it can do and ways that it can order.
And then the last big breakthrough for it was that it could take pieces of itself
and those pieces would all have free will because consciousness has free will.
And I'll mention that in a little bit why that is.
And these pieces of free will then can interact with each other.
As soon as you create bunches of things with free will, as time
goes by, they start to diverge.
They don't have the same experience.
They have different experiences.
So they have different opinions and different thoughts about
what they want to do today.
So then the interactions, each one of these things, the invention of time
and the invention of breaking itself up into pieces with free will, these
things create more possibilities the way things can go together to lower entropy.
It makes the system not only bigger, but smarter and more capable.
It grows, it evolves just like with people.
You go to the 1 cell thing, bacteria to multi cell things to jellyfish to frogs,
to lizards and eventually to to people.
Every step of that evolution makes things more complicated.
There's more order.
There's more structure.
Here we are human beings and we've got what 4 trillion cells
that are all working together, cooperatively to make a human being.
So that's a lot of order going on there.
So actually it turns out that the biological evolution
follows the same thing.
It's really lowering entropy as well.
It's that's what works.
It lowers entropy, but in its system, low entropy configurations are more
survivable because they're more complex.
They're more adjustable.
There's more things they can do, and they procreate better.
Again, there's more options for them and ways they can do things.
They're not limited to just a certain small set of possibilities.
They have lots of possibilities, which give them more abilities to
procreate and to survive because they have options that they didn't
have before with that ordering.
So it's the same with consciousness.
So that's basically my model.
So now if you believe that biology, the evolution of biological evolution,
if you think that's a science, then what I have is a science.
It's just as much a science as biology is.
Because what it does is once you understand how these, how this thing
evolved, you get a lot of facts that otherwise aren't clear, like biology
if you look at look at a what we call it the dolphin, look at a dolphin
and and you look at a dolphin's fin.
Guess what you'll find in there?
You'll have bones that look just like that.
It's like the bones are like a hand.
It's got fingers.
The fingers have joints, so they can move, but these fingers aren't moving.
It's part of a fin, but yet there's the hand with all the individual fingers and
all the finger joints for for motion.
And that tells you, that's a fact.
And if you didn't have evolution or biology, it'd be one of those paradoxes.
Why does that animal have hand bones in its fin?
Oh that animal probably was a land animal before it became a sea animal.
That evolution can work both ways.
Sometimes the sea was a better source of food than was the land.
Critters move to where the food is.
In any case it solves paradoxes because you understand the fundamentals
of how the system was built.
What were the rules that it was built on?
And mine is the same way.
So mine is a science.
It solves a lot of paradoxes.
Answers a lot of questions.
And as far as I can tell, there isn't anything that it can't really explain.
So it really is a theory of everything, including the subjective world.
They say, why are these people happy and those people are miserable?
It can say what it is about them that's created both the happiness and
the misery, boils down to, to really an understanding of a lot of things.
You can derive a moral code.
Philosophers have tried evolving a moral code for many centuries
and they always failed.
I think the last one that was really pretty good was Spinoza, a Spanish
philosopher and his moral code had flaws in it, like all the rest, because people
could always come up if you follow this code, you'll always make the right choice.
The good choice, the moral choice.
But you can always come up with some scenario it doesn't work in.
Yeah, but what if, and you can come and maybe really a obtuse 1 in a
million kind of scenario, but there are scenarios that it just doesn't fit.
The code is not universal.
It does explain a whole lot of what's right and what's wrong,
and what's moral and what's not, but it doesn't cover everything.
It's not universal.
It's got flaws in it.
This code of mine does define what's right and wrong.
In the long term, if what you do, the actions you take, the intents
you have, lowers entropy for both yourself and the system, that's right.
And if what you do and intend increases entropy in the long term for both
yourself and the system, that's wrong.
So it's just simple.
It all reduces to entropy.
Love can be defined as the nature of a low entropy individual, a low entropy entity.
That's love.
And the fear is the opposite of love.
That may strike people as being odd because they think love and hate are
the opposites, but that's not it.
There's something more fundamental than hate, and that is fear.
Hate is born out of fear.
In any case, it explains, on the soft side, it explains philosophy.
There's a philosophy called what is it now?
There's realism, which is basically what the physicists believe, and that is if
you can't measure it, it's not real.
Everything that, out there that you see, that's just the way it is, and
there isn't anything else but that.
And then there's the opposite of that, which is called idealism.
And idealism, Is the sense there is something beyond what you see and what
you feel out there in the world that is more fundamental and that's an old idea.
Remember the allegory of the men in the cave that Plato came up with, and he was
telling them that there's a fire behind them and they're looking at shadows
on the wall of the cave and they think that's all reality is the shadows.
Because these people have never, they can't turn around
and see what's behind them.
But there's another whole world behind them.
The fire and the people who tend the fire and where the firewood
came from, all of that is tended by something outside of their reality.
And their reality is just as limited to the shadows on the wall.
And yes, they can move and the shadows will move.
So they identify with the shadows as being who they are.
So that was Plato and he was an idealist and many of the best
philosophers through history have been idealists, I think was one of
the last big names was probably Kant.
He was An idealist, but in any case, that argument between idealism
and realism has been going on for millennia, and now it's solved.
Basically with the double slit experiment, it was solved.
And that is, it's not matter, matter is not fundamental, what's
fundamental is probabilistic, that's math, that's not anything physical.
In that point, that argument was done.
It turns out the idealists were right.
There is something behind the physical, otherwise.
Physical particles would not be based on, that means they
come from, probability waves.
That wouldn't work that way.
And, you know, in our science, all the tiny little particles are what
built or what are used to build bigger particles and bigger particles that we
get the kind of mass that we're used to.
But it's all built from the bottoms up out of these little subatomic particles
that are nothing but probability.
So that tells you that mass isn't the thing that is fundamental.
You might say probability is fundamental, but that doesn't really make any sense.
Probability is just a mathematics.
It's just the way of looking at certain parts of quantity that some things
are more or less probable than others.
But as it turns out, consciousness Is what is fundamental, the thing
that everything else is built out of.
Okay.
So I'd like to go back a little bit to your time at the Monroe Institute
because I'm fascinated by the work that he's done and read Bob's books.
So during that time you learned how to experience or visit different realities
other than our current one, which is the PMR, physical matter reality.
I've got that right.
Yeah.
was the most interesting alternative reality that you visited during that
time or even since then, actually?
There are a lot of alternative realities,
and there's all sorts of virtual realities out there.
I guess we ought to talk about virtual realities.
Virtual realities are realities that are created by a rule set, okay?
If you play The Sims, that's a virtual reality, and it's created by a rule
set of what the players can do.
There's certain things they can do, and certain things they can't do.
So if you, if they have a swimming pool and somebody goes around, pulls
up all the ladders they can't get out because the rules are that they
can't get out unless there's a ladder.
That's not the way it works in our universe, but that's the
way it works in the Sims world.
At least that's the way it did work when my youngest daughter
pulled all the ladders out and in order to get gravestones in her
front yard, because that was cool.
So anyway, I digress, but a virtual reality is made based on rules.
The rules that say what people can do and can't, it's the rules of
causality basically is what made up.
Now we live in a virtual reality.
This physical universe we call our physical universe, I guess that's
our name for it, a physical universe.
It's a virtual reality.
It's information.
Remember, consciousness gets information and takes that information and interprets
a reality from that information it gets.
So each of us is a piece of consciousness getting a data stream from the larger
consciousness system, and we interpret it to be this physical universe.
Alright, now that's not the only virtual reality in town.
There's lots of other virtual realities.
There's others like ours, what we call the physical universe,
that have a very tight rule set.
Now our rule set is what we call science.
It's physics, it's chemistry, it's biology.
Those are the rules of how things can work.
There's a physical causality defines what we can do and what we can't do.
A human being can't flap its hands and fly away.
It also can't jump 20 feet in the air, there's things we just can't do
because the rules just won't allow it.
We're too heavy, too much gravity, we're not made, we can't flap
our arms fast enough and etc.
We have to obey the rules.
We get hit in the head with something serious to give us brain damage, then
maybe we slur our speech, we drag our left foot and lose our memory.
But that doesn't affect consciousness any, that just means that now
that piece of consciousness has to deal with an avatar with damage.
Has to deal with an avatar.
Same in Sims.
If your Sims character gets damaged, then you just have to deal with a
damaged Sims character until they heal, until they get over the damage,
you have to deal with the damage.
So it that works the same way.
Now, there are also very loose rulesets, where you have a lot more leeway.
You don't have...
Every tiny interaction, part of a rule, like it is here with the physics.
Like your dream reality.
When you dream, you're basically interacting in a different reality frame.
When you daydream, you're creating a virtual reality.
You're consciousness, and you can create virtual realities in your own daydream.
And you do that only when your intellect is no longer feeding the daydream.
You might start your daydream with your intellect, but eventually if
you just let that daydream just go on and let it unravel as it does
without you making everything happen, then you're creating a virtual
reality from your own consciousness.
Consciousness can do that sort of thing.
Just wee little pieces of consciousness can do pretty much everything
the big consciousness can do.
We just can't do it as much, as well, as fast.
We're small pieces.
We're just little pieces of this consciousness so we don't have all the
abilities of the system, but we have most of the same attributes as the system.
So yes, when you fall asleep at night, you get a different data stream.
And that data stream has a loose rule set, and in your dreams you can teleport,
you can disappear one place, appear someplace else, things can come and
go in a hurry, and it doesn't have to make sense as far as, doesn't have to
be like it is here, in what we call the physical world, because it's a different
virtual reality with different rules.
There's a different virtual reality you go to after you die, and you're
no longer in this physical universe.
You end up in another virtual reality.
There's literally just hundreds of virtual realities that are
defined for one purpose or another.
And there are, I wouldn't say hundreds, but there's at least some
virtual realities that are just as tight a rule set as we have here.
Other worlds like our physical universe, but it's a physical
universe, but not like ours.
What makes it physical is the fact that it has a very tight rule set, lots of rules.
Every little tiny thing has to follow the rules.
There are, I've been to several, probably 5, 6, 8, 10, I don't
know, over the many years.
I've been doing this now for 50 years and I've been to quite a few of those
virtual realities that are physical and they have beings not always like us.
They mostly end up to be bipeds, but not always.
Sometimes there's other things that aren't like us at all that evolve.
But more often than not, they are like us, and their physics there is like ours too.
And the reason for that is that it's hard to get a rule set that
will create a stable universe.
Remember, I mentioned all those constants that had to be just so to nine decimal
places to get a stable universe.
It's not like you can just do that real easily.
That's a lot of trouble.
So the same ones that work there, tend to work elsewhere.
So yeah, they have gravity, just like we have gravity, that's one of the rules.
They have a lot of the things we have because it's hard to make a virtual
reality that will evolve for billions of years and not have it self destruct.
So it ends up that a lot of the things are similar because
the system uses what works.
Besides the system that's a information system.
It's a lot easier to say, copy, paste, and now you have three other virtual
realities that are based on the same building blocks as the first one.
That's just simple.
It's easy to do.
You don't always have to start from scratch.
If you spent you know, 10, 000 tries trying to get all those constants just
right, you don't have to do that again.
You can just start from what you've got.
Some of it's similar.
I've been to places that have been a lot uglier and meaner than what we have here.
And I've been to places, and let's just say less evolved than we are here.
And I've been to places that, one, one place, it was a little more
evolved than what we have here, but mostly they're less evolved.
We're one of the high end believe it or not with all the dysfunction
we've got in our world, you'd think we're on the bottom, but we're not.
We've got a lot of potential here that the others haven't yet gotten to.
Now, another thing I should put in here is that, so what is our purpose?
What are we supposed to do and why are we here playing in this virtual reality game?
We are individuated units of consciousness.
And in order to evolve, we make choices.
That's definition of consciousness.
It's awareness with a choice.
So the choices we were making when we didn't have this physical
reality full of avatars were like being in a big chat room.
The first virtual reality was communication protocols, and
that just defined language.
That's a rule set, defined language.
Okay, all these individual units of consciousness in the system could
all chit chat with each other because there was a virtual reality that
gave it communication protocols.
But there wasn't a lot of experience that was really meaningful and challenging.
It's just a big chat room with almost no rules.
So you could pretty much do anything and that was okay.
Not a lot of great consequences for the choices that you made.
So the system needed to make another virtual reality that was
more a tighter rule set because the tighter the rule set is, the more
consequences you create, right?
The more strategies you create.
In other words, let me make that a little clearer.
If you and I, if I said, okay, Rod let's play a game.
Okay.
You go first.
You wouldn't know what to do because we don't have any rules,
you'd say I get what you mean.
I go first.
There's no rules because there's no rules.
There's no game.
The game is made with rules.
Now, the rules could be real loose.
This is just high card.
You pick a card and I'll pick a card and the winner has the high card.
That's real simple.
Simple rules.
You don't have much strategy.
There's not much you can do about that.
You're just picking a card.
It's just random stuff.
But if you have real complex rules, oh, this character can only move sideways for
three slots, and this one can only move back and forth, and this one can do that.
And you've got all these rules.
Now you have something that has...
strategy.
You can figure out what to do and what to do next and what's good and what's not
good move and suddenly there's all kinds of complexity involved in the experience
of interacting with that rule set.
So the consciousness said we need a tighter rule set rather than
just communication protocols.
So the consciousness can experience meaningful consequences.
So it can learn and it can grow.
How does consciousness learn?
It learns how to lower its entropy.
That's what it's all about.
That's what drives us.
That's our mission.
That's what we're about is to lower the entropy of our consciousness.
And when we do that, the whole system's entropy is lowered a little
bit because we're part of the system.
That's our job, is to lower our entropy.
That is, grow up.
Okay?
And that turns out to be, lowering entropy is the same as cooperating.
Caring.
Interacting with each other positively.
And I can make that obvious if you just take two groups of people,
almost identical, except this group is called the love group, and this
other group is the fear group.
And you give each one of them a certain amount of resources, and certain space
that they can move in and say, all right, you guys go, okay, you got a
fairly tight rule set now like our earth.
What are they going to do?
The one that's the love group, they will cooperate.
They'll care about each other.
They will build a system with those resources to take care of
everybody as best they can, because they're everybody's interested that
everybody else gets their fair share.
That's just the way they are.
Okay.
That's the love group.
Now you have the fear group.
Of course, if you have fear, you don't have trust.
If you don't have trust, then it's all about you.
You're self centered.
And if it's self centered, then it's what can I get and how can I keep it?
And if everybody is in a what can I get and how can I keep it mode, then
pretty soon the big guys beat up the little guys and take their stuff.
That's just the way it is.
And then the little guys will get together and say, okay, there'll be
10 of us and we'll all work together.
And another big guy comes along, we'll lock him and take his stuff.
So then the big guys start forming up teams and, and so on that grows.
And what you have is very much like the reality we live in.
The fundamental ethic for civilization is the warlord.
That's how the strong get at the top, the ones that have power and those
delegate down through lower levels of power until you have all the serfs
and the peasants or whatever people at the bottom who do most all the
work, and you end up with 5% of the individuals owning 95% of all the stuff.
It's the warlord mentality is how we see the world.
How a lot of us see the world and that's just defines a
low quality of consciousness.
That's a high entropy consciousness, which is a low quality of consciousness.
A high quality of consciousness is a low entropy consciousness.
So you see, just looking at those two models, which one is the low entropy.
In other words, which one is stable, which one produces more, which one
ends up as being a place you'd like to live as opposed to not, and you'll
see that the low entropy, the thing that builds and can build on itself
and keep building on itself, you know, get a foundation and build.
As opposed to the fear group, which some of the people in their group
in a fear can build something up, but there's always already somebody
who wants to tear that down.
Somebody who wants to be the leader, somebody that wants to be
up higher on the top, and they'll get rid of those people on the top.
There's always warring, fighting, struggling, people trying to take each
other's stuff and manipulate the peasants.
And it's always struggle, which is very high entropy.
Everybody getting along and sharing and doing the best they can
together, that's very low entropy.
There's no conflict there.
You don't have that kind of thing.
There's not even any rudeness there.
It's just, I know it's hard to imagine but that's the way it works.
Yeah.
Now, some people will immediately say that, oh that one is it's controlled.
They have all these rules, and I don't want to, I'll be in that one that's
rowdy because that one has more freedom.
That's not true.
The one that is the low entropy has the fewest rules.
It doesn't have to have big hierarchies and all the rules that
force control down so that the top can control the middle and the bottom.
They don't need all of those rules.
They don't have rules.
It's not that, hey, you do this and you do that and here are the rules.
You're thinking that this collective over here that works nicely
together is run by a dictator.
It's not, because all of the experience that we have with collectives is they're
collectives of a bunch of people who have a very low quality of consciousness.
So you get a bunch of people together for a cooperative collective and they're
all people based on fear, what happens?
It turns into something ugly.
Okay, the people had grand ideas about how it was going to be so wonderful,
and everybody would love each other, but you got a bunch of high entropy people,
they're going to turn it into a warlord thing, and somebody's going to become
the dictator, and it all goes to hell in a handbasket, because the people...
They don't have enough quality to be caring.
It's all about them.
They're all self centered.
So the collective has a really bad name because it always fails and turns up in
something ugly because the people are not high quality enough to make it work.
But where you have a collective of high quality people, low entropy
people, which is what I said here, then it's not like that.
If somebody in the collective says, oh, I'm tired of doing brain surgery.
I need to get out and get some fresh air.
I need to do something else.
And the rest of the collective will try to adjust to make that
individual get what they want.
It's not I'm a brain surgeon, that's what I'm trained to do.
So whether that's boring or not, that's what I'm going to do for
the next 50 years or 30 years, because that's the track I'm on.
And you're stuck in that track.
In this other system, you're never stuck in anything.
The system that, of those people with the high quality of consciousness will adjust
itself to accommodate every individual as best it can, as best as possible.
So you decide what you want to do is make pretty pictures and write poetry.
That has value and that's valued.
So that's fine.
And if you want to do that instead of brain surgery, that's okay, too.
So the system will train enough brain surgeons and train enough
whatever so that you can do what you want to do when you want to do it.
You got a midlife crisis and suddenly you want to change everything.
The rest of the system will support it.
That's changes.
So you have the maximum amount of freedom in that love.
Rather than in a fear group, you have the minimum amount of freedom.
There's always a lot of rules.
Because the people at the top make rules to make sure they stay on top.
And you have all these rules to prevent low quality of consciousness
from killing each other.
You've got all the criminal law, which is all a bunch of rules.
You don't need criminal law in this other place.
There are no criminals.
You don't have any of that kind of behavior.
Nobody wants to take it over.
Nobody wants to be the leader.
Nobody wants to do that because they're all high quality individuals.
So I know hard to imagine that's possible.
But just think it's theoretically possible.
Yes, we could grow up that much.
So let's see, where was I?
So that's the reason our purpose here on this life is to grow up, become love.
Make those choices, make it about other rather than about self.
Get rid of the self centered 'oh, it's all about me' and what I want and how
can I get it, and then how can I keep it, and who do I have to run over to get it?
It's how can I control things?
We want to control everything.
We want to control our spouse.
We want to control our children.
We want them to be this way instead of that way.
When I talk about that warlord mentality, it's not just politics in nation states.
It's about individuals.
Individuals see themselves as little warlords of their own.
A little universe that they live in and they want the kids to grow
up and be doctors and lawyers and instead of drug addicts.
So they, put rules out there, but the rules tend to drive kids to be the
drug addicts, so it's a different idea that's hard for people to get their
heads around this different idea.
So yes, there's lots of other virtual realities out there.
Lots of virtual realities.
Every reality, that means anywhere that you can have experience, if
you can experience in that reality, then it's a virtual reality.
Because the only way you can have experience is if there are rules that
provide context for the experience.
Just like that game I said, if I just say, okay, here's a game, you go
first, you can't experience that game.
There's no experience because there aren't any rules.
It's the rules that create the experience.
If any reality you can be in, dreaming, imagining, out of bodying, anything that
you can be in, there you can experience, that's a virtual reality, because
rules are required for experience.
They create the context for the experience.
Yes, lots of other realities out there.
The larger consciousness system wouldn't put all of its eggs in just one basket.
It would have different virtual realities.
And maybe the way that they're managed would be different, because
the system would like to say, what's the most effective and efficient
way to run this virtual reality?
What can we do to help those conscious's that are playing
characters in that reality to grow up, to lower their entropy?
What could we do to make it a more effective training aid, because these
realities, our physical universe is an entropy reduction trainer.
We're in it being trained to make lower entropy choices.
Because by doing that, we evolve and the system evolves and the system will
support us and try to help us as it can, because our success is its success.
So there's multiple realities around because there's multiple
ways to approach that problem.
So I'm just hitting the highlights here and there, there's a whole
lot of things I'm not talking about because our show isn't that long.
We'd have to go for five or six hours, to get it, to get most of it out.
But In any case over to you, Rod I guess I've stirred up a
few questions in all of that.
Yeah that's why I always often have people come back for a live stream
because of all the other questions.
I think what we'll do is in stirring up this, I think people
are going to say, be saying, okay how do I learn more about this?
How do I, get in touch with these alternative realities
that Tom is talking about?
So why don't you tell us a bit about, I know you've got your books, why
don't you tell us a bit about what else you've got going on, how people
can learn more about what you do and any other programs you might have Tom.
Okay, first just a little basics, and that is that all of the paranormal
things happen in the intuitive channel.
Your consciousness basically has two channels in which
it processes information.
One channel is the intuitive channel, the other channel is the intellectual
channel, or the logic channel.
The intuitive channel does not do logic.
It does information without logic.
You get things, but it's not logical.
You just know.
It's the intuitive channel.
All things paranormal happen in the intuitive channel.
Now, we Westerners, and probably most Easterners these days too, the Western
cultures run over the whole world.
We tend to develop our intellectual...
side a lot because we do that.
We start with preschool and then school and then high school and
then college and graduate school.
We keep working on it.
Even if we don't go to school, we keep learning things.
Learning new skills, learning new things, understanding things better.
All of that is on our intellectual side.
Okay?
And on the intuitive side, we're not as smart intuitively as we
were when we were three years old.
When we were three years old, we were more intuitive than we are now.
And we've lost even that little bit.
So here we are with this, big macho muscle, and this tiny little infant baby
of a development on the intuitive side, almost to the point that scientists
will tell you, there is no intuition.
Intuition doesn't exist.
So all of the paranormal things then just can't exist because that's where they are.
So if you want to learn that, you have to learn it through your own experience.
Like I said, if it's not your experience, it's not your truth.
If you want to understand this larger reality from the inside, then you need
to experience these things and convince yourself through your own actions
and interactions that this is real.
And because I tell people don't believe anything I say, you need
to go experience it yourself.
And you can experience everything that I've experienced is open for experience.
I'm not particularly special in that only I can experience it,
everybody can experience it.
All right, how do you develop your intuitive side to where you can
experience it, where you can depend on it?
First, I will tell you that once you develop your intuitive side, you will
find it's just as correct, just as reliable as your intellectual side.
Right now, when it's undeveloped, you think it's flaky.
It's like your gut hunches, they are wrong as often as they are right.
That's because your intuitive side is undeveloped.
But once you develop it, actually, the truth is, it's more
accurate and more dependable.
More reliable than the intellectual side.
But I generally don't say that because I know that pushes
people's credibility buttons.
It's actually more reliable.
And the reason for that is your intellectual side is always
stymied by a lack of information.
Logic, deductive logic, requires a lot of information.
Okay, what is it I said the earlier important things?
Who should I marry?
How many children should I have?
Okay, now figure that out logically.
You can't figure that out logically.
There's not enough information.
The only way to figure that out logically is if you had a crystal ball
and if this happened to be a a reality that what is it called if you're a
materialist you're also a determinist.
If it was a determinist reality where nothing ever changed, nothing evolves,
nothing is learned, nothing ever changes.
It's determined at the beginning.
It's all done.
All right, if you were in a determinist reality and had a crystal ball, then
you'd know who to marry because you could just look and see how that
worked out over the next 50 years.
But you don't.
One, it's not a determinist reality.
There is no done deal on the future.
The future happens as we make choices.
There's possibilities and there's potentials and there's probabilities, and
there's a database that's the probable future database of all those things that
are likely to happen or that not likely that could happen all the possibilities
and the probabilities that each might happen, so that database is there.
There is no future.
So without a crystal ball, your logic isn't worth a damn when it comes to
the big questions of who do I marry?
Or how many children are we going to have?
Or, what sort of dog am I going to buy?
And just anything.
Which job should I take?
And inside that job, which position should I take?
Should I take this or should I wait for something better?
There's no logical answers to any of those questions.
All the questions you have that are really important to you are
all done on the intuitive side.
None of them can be solved from the intellectual side.
Now, we pretend that we solve them in the intellectual side.
We're good at pretending that.
We think we're very rational people and we run our life with logic, but that's
nonsense because we never have enough information to run our life with logic.
We run our life based on guessing.
And that guessing is based on our experience.
We have experiences, and things work out this way, so we guess that they
probably, previous trends will continue.
So we make guesses based on experiences, the way we deal
with that lack of information.
And when you make guesses based on the past, you're wrong an awful
lot, because the past doesn't have to repeat itself all the time.
If that's your mode of getting through life, then you'll be wrong almost as often
as you're right, because in dealing with people and what people do and why they do
it past experience just doesn't tell you a whole lot because everybody's different.
We aren't machines.
If we were all machines, that would work pretty well.
But we're not.
So we get a lot of it wrong.
We don't understand each other and we guess we think everybody's
like us and everybody thinks like us and feels like us.
And that's a very poor assumption to make.
But we treat everybody with the idea that they're just like us, but they aren't.
So everybody has this intuitive side, and they can develop it.
And I have some tools for developing, I have two really major tools for developing
your intuitive side, which will open the doors for all the paranormal things,
and I suggest that you put some time into it because it's not all that hard.
You can be reasonably good at healing other people with your mind very quickly.
You can be good at it almost immediately.
And get reasonably good at it in six months.
It doesn't take a lot of time.
That's one of the easiest paranormal things to do.
Because there's so much uncertainty in the probabilities with it.
Because biology is so complex, there's lots of uncertainties
about what might happen.
It's a very complex machine, and you really don't know how that might work out.
There are people that have stage 4 cancer, and given two weeks to live, and after
a week, they don't have any cancer at all, and they live another 30 years.
That happens.
So biology is just has so many possibilities and what we're
doing is manipulating the possibilities with your intent.
You can modify those probable future database.
You can modify the probabilities in that database.
So what is probable to happen?
Those probabilities will shift.
It doesn't mean that you'll get what you want.
It just means the probabilities have shifted, so it's a little
more likely you get what you want.
If what you wanted was a million to one, and now it's only a thousand to one
you're still not going to get it likely.
It's still a thousand to one, but you've really moved the probability a whole lot,
so it depends on where the probabilities are, how much you can move them, and how
adept you are at being able to move them.
But that's the way that works, so everybody can learn that sort of thing.
If you're doing remote viewing, you can be...
Good at it to where most of the time you get a lot of it, but not all of it but
a lot of it you know in what you know a week or two, you know a month or two.
It's just not that hard so you can do these things but you have to develop
that intuitive side and the hardest thing that people have, the thing
that makes it difficult is you've got this big muscle guy on your left
brain and that is your intellect.
And that intellect always wants to butt in and solve the problem because
that's how you deal with life.
You lead in life with your intellect.
Your intellect looks at things, finds out where the problems
are, avoids the problems.
Yay for my intellect.
And that's how you run this life.
As soon as you get into the intuitive channel, your
intellect wants to also butt in.
And as soon as it butts in, the intuitive channel's gone.
The intuitive channel isn't run by the intellect.
It's trashed by the intellect.
So the intuitive channel has to tell the intellect, go sit down, I
just want to experience something.
Leave me alone and don't butt in.
And most people have a real hard time getting their intellect to do
that because they're so habituated to that intellect running everything.
So that is the...
That's the big problem.
So it's not that we have to learn some clever new way of doing things.
We have to unlearn an old way of doing things, which is our
intellect's running everything.
We have to let that happen.
We have to just be open to the information and then get it.
Now, if our intellect is guessing what it is that will ruin it.
It won't work.
So I have two methods for doing that.
And there's really two methods for getting into the intuitive
state, developing your intuition.
One of them is through the standard role of meditation.
That's typical.
And what you do there is that you discipline your mind.
And most of it is discipline, disciplining your intellect to be quiet.
So in meditation, they'll tell you to sit down and have no thoughts.
In other words, tell your intellect to be quiet.
Yeah.
And eventually.
you will learn to discipline that intellect and be able to turn it off.
So the whole, the whole exercise in meditation is just to
discipline the intellect to get it to sit down and be quiet.
That's the whole point of it, mostly.
And a lot of people struggle with that and find it hard to do some find it
almost impossible to do and it takes time to do that because you not only need to
shut that intellect down for a second or two, but for the next half hour so
you can actually do things on the other side and not a single question or thought
or anything comes through your mind.
It's just open.
Ok, that's you becoming aware of the intuitive side.
And after that, just a little bit of work.
You can work on those paranormal things and they'll be fairly easy.
The other two things that get in the way, three things actually, they're all
based on one thing, and that's fear.
It's your fear will get in the way.
Now the fear has children.
There's two children of fear.
Where one of them is ego and the other one is belief.
Fears create a lot of ego and a lot of belief.
And that ego and that belief will cause you trouble.
So getting rid of your fear is really a good thing to do.
It'll make your intuitive voyages much easier and much more productive.
If you've got fear, then you'll take that fear with you and you'll
find all sorts of scary things while you're in your intuitive side.
You will intuit a lot of scary junk that's just your own fear
coming right out of your ego.
So that will get in the way.
All right, these two products, one of them is Explore the Larger
Conscious System with Thomas Campbell.
It's a program.
It's a program that you can take.
It spans I don't know, five days, six days, and it's not all that expensive.
It was what happened was that I gave these, this program, in real brick and
mortar locations, we gave this program and because they're brick and mortar
locations, you know, venues, there's food, there's travel costs, they're
pretty expensive and if you have all the costs figured in, it's $2000 or $3000
to spend 5 days learning this stuff.
So it's pretty expensive.
I did that maybe, I don't know, 30, 40 times.
Yeah.
And friends of mine, Donna and Keith Warner, they took all of those 30 or
40 of those times, searched through them, and took the best of all of them.
Take a whole thing and created one five day course.
And they put it on audio, so on Soundwise.
And if you go to their website, which is mbtevents.
com, they will have lots of pointers to that.
And you can get that.
Now that is the path that generally runs through meditation.
Okay, you expect it to be able to quiet your mind.
The other one is Tom's Park.
Tom's Park is another way that you can get there, and it has
nothing to do with meditation.
You don't have to be able to meditate at all.
The discipline just comes naturally, and it uses your imagination.
And the imagination is another way to get there.
Again, with the imagination, you start, you learn to imagine and
then just let the action roll on by itself without you being there.
And I've got a thing called Tom's Park that will explain it all to you.
And you get into the physical part of the park 1st to develop
your imagination skills.
And then you go into the parts of the park that are mainly about the non physical
things that you can deal with in there.
So two ways that you can find out for yourself,
and I recommend you do find out for yourself.
I wish I'd had three hours to talk to you, Tom, but it's been great.
Thank you very much for coming on the show and perhaps we'll have
you back again for a live stream.
And I really appreciate your time today.
Okay well, you're welcome.