Slashdot Mirror

According to Ingo Swann, This is what ultimately killed the program. The spooks hated the idea that there are no secrets.

I met Ingo twice, in Las Vegas. He said that he ought to have written more fiction books, which paid better than being a psychic lab rat.

Ingo Swann has a nice little website about his involvement with the US Remote Viewing program. I saw the man speak in Las Vegas twice - 2004 and 2006 (I think I personally drove him into retirement - he is now deceased). The first time was just a Q&A, the second he had prepared some remarks. The program was started as a threat analysis - "the soviets are spending all this money on psychic spying, tee hee har har what a bunch of fucking idiots. BUT WHAT IF IT WORKS?" So they had to create a program to evaluate the possibility that information can be obtained bioinformatically - through the aether, so to speak.

Mr. Swann said that he did not do public remote viewing "demonstrations", and only ever worked with scientists.

It seems to me that performing the experiments and testing hypotheses is science, but dismissing an idea as nutty without performing an experiment is pseudoscience. It's belief without evidence that makes something pseudoscience, even if it's believing an idea is nutty.

Mr. Swann said that because the spooks hated the remote viewing program, they had to get positive results right from the start. It lasted for over 20 years, and was killed as soon as possible when the Soviet Union broke up.

I have a copy of Art Bell (of coast-to-coast AM fame) interviewing Ingo Swann, author of Penetration: The Question of Human and Extraterrestrial Telepathy.

Ingo was the creative genius behind the CIA's remote viewing program (which was shut down after 20 years because it "didn't work". Conveniently this was just after the soviet union fell apart). In the interview he talked about how he was asked to remote view the moon by an agency that didn't officially exist. "50% of what I know I put in my book, Penetration..."

The most memorable line of the whole interview:

Art: What's on the moon, Ingo?
Ingo: [hesitation] ... Stuff.
Art: Stuff?
Ingo: and THEM.

I found a copies of both the book and the mp3 on the torrents once.

Swann's books on "Secrets of Power" are very high level too... Policemen have "false power" because they lose whatever they've got when they lose the job. Presidents are in the same boat... Bankers are more powerful than Presidents because they control the money.

HTH. :)

From the /. story headline (emphasis added):

Bruce Bueno de Mesquita Uses Games To See the Future

Having read the fine links, it seems Mr. de Mesquita doesn't actually "see the future". He gathers data and throws it into his computer, which applies game rules to determine the most likely outcome. To me, "seeing the future" implies predicting the unpredictable - assasinations, a meteor taking out a major area, the abdication of a king (so he could marry his American sweetheart), etc.

Indeed, here's a quote from the New Scientist article:

According to political scientist Nolan McCarty of Princeton University, this is the real strength of the approach. "I suspect the model's success is largely due to the fact that Bueno de Mesquita is very good on the input side; he's a very knowledgeable person and a widely respected political scientist. I'm sceptical that the modelling apparatus adds as much predictive power as he says it does."

Methinks Mr. de Mesquita's method works because he meticulously gathers excellent data. If his data was sloppy, his rate of successful "predictions" would be much lower than it is.

Sometimes events which are 'unpredictable' happen. In retrospect we say, 'oh yes, this event was the only logical event to have taken place'. But such an event is typically unthinkable before it happens. Mr. deMesquita's model doesn't allow for the unpredictable, and is therefore NOT 'future seeing'.

I have a book on seeing the future. Here's a quote from the first couple pages that I typed up for a 2008 election prediction poll on K5 a while back:

Your Nostradamus Factor, by Ingo Swann

Chapter 1: Jumping The Time Barrier

Like many others, I've had good reasons during my life to assume that the future can be seen. But if I had any doubt it would have vanished as a result of an astonishing forty-five seconds when I found myself in Detmold, then in West Germany, in the spring of 1988.

Detmold is near the beautiful Teutoburger Forest and a famous pre-Christian shrine, Horn-Externstein, which is a pile of towering rocks riddled with sonorous caves. Until the time of Charlemagne it is said that Nordic kings came to Horn-Externstein to consult seers about the future.

I was invited to Detmold by Herr Manfred Himmel in April 19988 to give a series of lectures about psi research. This was Herr Himmel's fifth "esoteric" conference, and it was well attended by several hundred people. Herr Himmel was ardent about psychic matters, and the talks of his other speakers were interesting to me. Some of these speakers were also practicing psychics who were busy giving individual "readings" and making predictions about the future.

I was billed as the famous American superpsychic who had "astonished scientists" since my first formal laboratory experiments in 1970. But I have never given individual "readings," and I never made predictions about the future.

Many of Herr Himmel's conference attendees were visibly disappointed that I did not give the expected readings and did not foresee the future. Although I had studied "prophecy" and predicting for many years and had even experienced some novel insights about it, I was well aware that most predictions turn out to be wrong. I felt I had a scientific reputation to protect, which would be damaged if I accumulated a list of erroneous predictions. Moreover, I didn't view myself as a future-seer in any professional sense, and I though that predicting should be left to those who were or at least tried to be.

I gave several lectures and workshops at the conference, as well as the keynote address. I had worked hard at preparing this address, entitling it "Revising Psychic Research Methods and Expectations in the New Age," and even gave the opening statements in German before continuing

Not only YouTube it, but Google it, too.

  bujinkan
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=bujinkan&search_type=
also check out
Taijutsu
Masaaki Hatsumi

Also,

http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/Pages/MartialArtsAndSuperpowers.html
by Charles Daniel.

Talks about being blindfolded, and having someone of your skill shoot at you meaning to kill you, and moving at an angle to their *intent*.

I[t] just appears that like any other ability (sight and hearing included) different people have different levels of innate ability, and in the case of telepathy the vast majority are below the threshold of being able to notice it at all, and those few that do lack the a significant way of testing and training the ability.

The primary difference is in the training people pursue.

Ingo Swann says the "superpowers" are universal, and can also be trained. Some people are better than others, as with any field of human activity, but that has more to do with the level of development achieved in previous lifetimes than anything else. Some people are born super-psychics, others as a math-wiz, others as a music virtuoso, etc - all levels of competency evolve and develop over multiple life experiences.

In addition to labeling Randi as a 'fraud' yesterday, I also gave a link to Mr. Swann's recent piece on the biological basis of Telepathy.

Ingo regularly castigates the parapsychology establishment for undertaking poorly designed experiments. I think Mr. Swann says that telepathy and the other "superpowers of the human bio-mind" (remote viewing, telekenesis, out-of-body-travel, etc.), are experiences first, and everyone has a different experience. The differences are such that the phenomena do not respond well to the exacting controls of standardized trials.

I know I myself have had any number of experiences unexplainable by the standard "scofftic" crowd...

For example, my dogs' cranio sacral therapist came by today. Advanced Cranio Sacral technique works at the junction between matter and energy, between the physical body's non-living atoms and the life force that animates it.

I myself have had good experiences with a competent Cranial Osteopath. When the one dog started limping after he got chased out of the back of the truck by grandpa's wheelchair, I searched out someone who uses cranial technique on animals. "Ask and ye shall receive, search and the door shall be open to you." The other dog was adopted at approximently 6 years old, and three years later he was still a nervous wreck, acting like he expected to get kicked to the curb at any moment.

The "injured dog" took to the work immediately. Two sessions later, no more limp.

The "heartbroken dog" has taken a lot more work. At the start of the first session, he wouldn't let the lady touch him. She asked me if it was okay if she worked 'remotely' - I said it was fine by me. She sat some distance away from the dog (2 or 3 feet), and did her thing as I watched. Before long, he opened up to the treatment, and allowed her to proceed.

"Heartbroken dog" has had ... probably around 8 sessions, and he's totally changed. Whereas before he was in a constant state of panic, he's now happy and playful. Whereas before his ears were constantly pulled back, as if to say "oh no, what have I done!", the ears are now perked forward, as "hey, what's going on here?"

My aunt adopted a one-eyed 6-month old Doberman almost 3 years ago. The dog was wild; my dad said he needed Ritalin. "Cowboy" wouldn't let the cranio-sacral therapist touch him at all for the first two sessions, and she did her work separated by a couple feet of air. I had to sneak him out of the boarder's for the second session, and the lady who was staffing the front desk said "you can go get him, because he doesn't like me." A week and a half later I saw her again, and she said "he's [cowboy] not as aggressive as he used to be..." After the third session everyone started noticing what a changed dog he was. Today that same staffer at the dog boarding house commented on how "cowboy loves me now" - quite a change from the "I'm gonna kill you" bark he used to give her.

I'm sure there will be any number of

I[t] just appears that like any other ability (sight and hearing included) different people have different levels of innate ability, and in the case of telepathy the vast majority are below the threshold of being able to notice it at all, and those few that do lack the a significant way of testing and training the ability.

The primary difference is in the training people pursue.

Ingo Swann says the "superpowers" are universal, and can also be trained. Some people are better than others, as with any field of human activity, but that has more to do with the level of development achieved in previous lifetimes than anything else. Some people are born super-psychics, others as a math-wiz, others as a music virtuoso, etc - all levels of competency evolve and develop over multiple life experiences.

In addition to labeling Randi as a 'fraud' yesterday, I also gave a link to Mr. Swann's recent piece on the biological basis of Telepathy.

Ingo regularly castigates the parapsychology establishment for undertaking poorly designed experiments. I think Mr. Swann says that telepathy and the other "superpowers of the human bio-mind" (remote viewing, telekenesis, out-of-body-travel, etc.), are experiences first, and everyone has a different experience. The differences are such that the phenomena do not respond well to the exacting controls of standardized trials.

I know I myself have had any number of experiences unexplainable by the standard "scofftic" crowd...

For example, my dogs' cranio sacral therapist came by today. Advanced Cranio Sacral technique works at the junction between matter and energy, between the physical body's non-living atoms and the life force that animates it.

I myself have had good experiences with a competent Cranial Osteopath. When the one dog started limping after he got chased out of the back of the truck by grandpa's wheelchair, I searched out someone who uses cranial technique on animals. "Ask and ye shall receive, search and the door shall be open to you." The other dog was adopted at approximently 6 years old, and three years later he was still a nervous wreck, acting like he expected to get kicked to the curb at any moment.

The "injured dog" took to the work immediately. Two sessions later, no more limp.

The "heartbroken dog" has taken a lot more work. At the start of the first session, he wouldn't let the lady touch him. She asked me if it was okay if she worked 'remotely' - I said it was fine by me. She sat some distance away from the dog (2 or 3 feet), and did her thing as I watched. Before long, he opened up to the treatment, and allowed her to proceed.

"Heartbroken dog" has had ... probably around 8 sessions, and he's totally changed. Whereas before he was in a constant state of panic, he's now happy and playful. Whereas before his ears were constantly pulled back, as if to say "oh no, what have I done!", the ears are now perked forward, as "hey, what's going on here?"

My aunt adopted a one-eyed 6-month old Doberman almost 3 years ago. The dog was wild; my dad said he needed Ritalin. "Cowboy" wouldn't let the cranio-sacral therapist touch him at all for the first two sessions, and she did her work separated by a couple feet of air. I had to sneak him out of the boarder's for the second session, and the lady who was staffing the front desk said "you can go get him, because he doesn't like me." A week and a half later I saw her again, and she said "he's [cowboy] not as aggressive as he used to be..." After the third session everyone started noticing what a changed dog he was. Today that same staffer at the dog boarding house commented on how "cowboy loves me now" - quite a change from the "I'm gonna kill you" bark he used to give her.

I'm sure there will be any number of

A scientific community cannot practice its trade without some set of received beliefs. These beliefs form the foundation of the "educational initiation that prepares and licenses the student for professional practice". The nature of the "rigorous and rigid" preparation helps ensure that the received beliefs are firmly fixed in the student's mind. Scientists take great pains to defend the assumption that scientists know what the world is like...To this end, "normal science" will often suppress novelties which undermine its foundations. Research is therefore not about discovering the unknown, but rather "a strenuous and devoted attempt to force nature into the conceptual boxes supplied by professional education". (emphasis added)

**

From the top of our system on down, there are many who could stand up and be counted regarding the efficiency of developed remote viewing, and even regarding superior natural psychics. It has been circulated in the intelligence community that successful remote viewing sessions probably saved the nation a billion-plus dollars in what otherwise would have been wasted, or misdirected, activities. Not a bad payback for the $20 million.

Why do they not stand up and be counted? For the most part, they are afraid of being taken apart in the press, afraid of being ridiculed for doing their duty in an area of threat analysis which was completely justified. This fear is not their fault. It is the fault of our unthinking and irresponsible popular culture.

**

I now direct your attention to "successful remote viewing," and ask you to wonder if it can exist. Begin by considering psychics who successfully help the police. Add to that success some quite good remote viewing training. Then consider that what is a bit possible in natural psychics might be understood, developed, and then trained.

Now assume that a "little-bit-psychic" can become a "whole-lot-psychic" -- and you come up with the "eight martini result."

Those of you who witnessed the Nightline TV show of 28 November 1995, will recall an individual said to be from the CIA, but identified only by the name "Norm."

Mr. Robert Gates had just finished saying that remote viewing was unpromising. But when it came "Norm's" time to talk, he began saying something like, "Well, if it's the Eight-Martini Results you want to talk about, I won't talk about them."

What, then, is an "eight-martini" result? Well, this is an intelligence community in-house term for remote viewing data so good that it cracks everyone's realities. So they have to go out and drink eight martinis to recover. Remote viewing does have its amusing aspects, you know.

**

-http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/Pages/Stateme nt .html (emphasis added)

... a fraud with an agenda. He's no different that a bible-thumping jesus freak, except he beats the "materialist" drum.

But as one "super-psychic" points out, even scientists now say that matter-as-we-know-it only makes up between 4 and 7% of the universe. The rest is labeled as "dark matter" and "dark energy". They don't know what exactly it is, but that plain matter is inadequate to explain the measurements taken by cosmologists.

See Ingo Swann's Telepathy - The Opening Up Of (Part 1 of 3) for more on the new understanding of the biological basis behind telepathy.

I road-tripped to Vegas to hear Ingo's talk earlier this summer. He's a very smart man. "I only work with scientists" (he's now retired). He'd prepared some notes, and held up his copies of Scientific American and other mainstream sources... And pointed out that "dark energy" interpenetrates everything, and is the carrier medium for experiences previously labeled "extra-sensory".

(the basis of his talk was that "we need new words, because there are experiences that don't have a label, and the words we do have limit us to concepts that are 200 years out of date" Or something like that...)

**

From the top of our system on down, there are many who could stand up and be counted regarding the efficiency of developed remote viewing, and even regarding superior natural psychics. It has been circulated in the intelligence community that successful remote viewing sessions probably saved the nation a billion-plus dollars in what otherwise would have been wasted, or misdirected, activities. Not a bad payback for the $20 million.

Why do they not stand up and be counted? For the most part, they are afraid of being taken apart in the press, afraid of being ridiculed for doing their duty in an area of threat analysis which was completely justified. This fear is not their fault. It is the fault of our unthinking and irresponsible popular culture.

**

I now direct your attention to "successful remote viewing," and ask you to wonder if it can exist. Begin by considering psychics who successfully help the police. Add to that success some quite good remote viewing training. Then consider that what is a bit possible in natural psychics might be understood, developed, and then trained.

Now assume that a "little-bit-psychic" can become a "whole-lot-psychic" -- and you come up with the "eight martini result."

Those of you who witnessed the Nightline TV show of 28 November 1995, will recall an individual said to be from the CIA, but identified only by the name "Norm."

Mr. Robert Gates had just finished saying that remote viewing was unpromising. But when it came "Norm's" time to talk, he began saying something like, "Well, if it's the Eight-Martini Results you want to talk about, I won't talk about them."

What, then, is an "eight-martini" result? Well, this is an intelligence community in-house term for remote viewing data so good that it cracks everyone's realities. So they have to go out and drink eight martinis to recover. Remote viewing does have its amusing aspects, you know.

**

-http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/Pages/Statement .html (emphasis added)

Silly pseudo-scientists, always trying to marginalise empirical evidence in favour of their own skewed (imagined or not) experiences

Let me help you out here, because you seem to be confused.

Emperical3 : capable of being verified or disproved by observation or experiment

Observations and experiments almost universally support the existence of the vitalistic overview. The exception comes when the experimenter strongly believes in the materialistic overview.

Also the CIA found out remote viewing doesn't work for shit.

What evidence do you have to back that up? Or have you just taken YOUR belief and carefully selected which "evidence" you're willing to consider?

Mr. Swann says that the CIA spooks always hated their program, so they had to get results, right from the start. If the results weren't there, they would have been shut down immediately.

At a rare 2004 question-and-answer session, Mr. Swann told a story from SRI. He was sitting on a throne in the restroom when two spooks walked in. One spook said to the other [paraphrased], "wow, they got some really good stuff going on here." The other responds, "yeah, next thing you now they'll be reading our minds." Swann: "I knew the program was doomed..."

-----

Consider Mr. Swann's 1995 statement on Remote Viewing. Selected quotes (emphasis added):

"This is to say that the intelligence community did not conduct psychic research and go out on a limb just for the hell of it. In fact, that community never did psychic research. What it did was to assess the threat of the Soviet efforts. ... All media reports of the 1970s correctly identified the purpose of this threat analysis, albeit with a good deal of joking and amusement.

"At the time, this threat analysis was perfectly justified, completely necessary, and unquestionably required in behalf of the well-being of the nation."

"[We] clearly confirmed the reality of the threat. Even most of the 1970s media concluded that the work was necessary, even if it was funny and ridiculous according to Western anti-psychic traditions."

"... Those of you who witnessed the Nightline TV show of 28 November 1995, will recall an individual said to be from the CIA, but identified only by the name "Norm."

"Mr. Robert Gates had just finished saying that remote viewing was unpromising. But when it came "Norm's" time to talk, he began saying something like, "Well, if it's the Eight-Martini Results you want to talk about, I won't talk about them."

"What, then, is an "eight-martini" result? Well, this is an intelligence community in-house term for remote viewing data so good that it cracks everyone's realities. So they have to go out and drink eight martinis to recover. Remote viewing does have its amusing aspects, you know."

That tends to make me think that we do in fact, have a pretty good grasp of the laws of physics. IMO, the only thing we're missing is the "gravity to the rest of it" connection, confounded by the inconvienient fact that gravity appears to be the only force in the universe which is apparently instantainious over galactic distances.

Ah yes, the old "only missing a page or two out of the Book of Physics". Problem is that the pages aren't numbered. So this one little itsy bitsy problem of "gravity to the rest of it" could very well be huge - dozens of chapters yet to be discovered.

The materialist peanut gallery claimed victory over the vitalists (advocates of a non-material life force existing separate from matter, which 'animates', making the difference between 'dead' and 'alive') after Newton put together his works, they said it again after Einstien put together General Relativity. Always trying to marginalize non-physical experience, silly materialists.

But, as Ingo Swann recently pointed out, now even the scientists say that matter only accounts for 4-7% of the universe, the rest being "dark matter" and "dark energy", which interpenetrates EVERYTHING else.

Say, Remote Viewing is instantaneous like Gravity too - how does that skill fit into the physical model? Mr. Swann says (with good experience training others to back it up) that these powers are possessed by everyone, and it's only a matter of doing the proper training... (There was a Mythbusters TV segment on Remote Viewing, and the skill passed their test). :)

Liked your comment, but I think you're missing something.

In Secrets of Power, Vol. 1, Ingo Swann talks about how social institutions have been set up to "depower" the masses. (Mr. Swann is something of a word nazi and notes that "depower" is not yet in the dictionary, but that it should be. It refers to how an individual loses his Power. The book is heavy heavy reading, so I don't recommend it - I've only been able to skim through it.)

This is especially obvious in the perennially broken government schools. John Taylor Gatto tells us that the government schools were specifically set up to depower the population (to use Mr. Swann's word), and make them (us) suitable for factory work. Pre-government school, the american ideal was an independant livelihood. Post-government school, most people hope for a good job with a good company with good benefits.

One of the side-effects of depowerment, is that people don't realize their creative potential. If the government schools taught people to use their power of creativity, more would figure out, like you, that the rat race isn't worth running.

Also see my other comment in this story, about hidden inflation and making your own food.

it's the old materialism vs. vitalism "holy war".

Scientists in the persuasion of Materialism believe that the universe is fundamentally composed of matter.

Vitalists maintain that the physical universe is just a very tiny subset of "all that is". Conciousness is primary, the physical universe is the playground that we all are currently occupying.

Matrix terminology: Conciousness is "the real world", whereas the physical universe is "the matrix". The movie was based on buddhist philosophy, so it is an apt analogy.

See Ingo Swann's Psychic Sexuality for more on the age-old Materialism vs. Vitalism debate, from a decidedly pro-vitalist perspective. (Sexuality being, of course, where most of us encounter vitalism-related phenomena).

I'm not sure how this relates to "Vitalism", which has nothing to do with Mirror Neurons and is untestable.

I think of it this way: Mirror Neurons and the other structures Mr. Swann talks about in this paper are analogous to "radio receivers", whereby thoughts/feelings/images/smells/etc are 'transmitted' or 'shared' in some form or fashion between two bodies. Furthermore, this transmission and reception is not limited to isolated structures of the brain, but is instead a fundamental part of our makeup/existence. A different way of looking at the brain is not as the "human CPU", but more like a radio set, which channels a specific non-material "entity" into a specific human body.

Materialism is the doctrine that matter is first cause, and everything else is a byproduct thereof. Vitalism is the philosophy that Conciousness is primary, and everything else derives therefrom. It's like in the Matrix (which was based on Buddhist philosophy) - there's the "real world" (conciousness), and the illusory Matrix (our shared physical experience).

Of course, I'm just figuring this out for myself, so I reserve the right to revise whatever I've said here in the future. :)

You might be intererested in Robert Monroe's three books (I recommend starting with the first one - the library probably has a copy). Robert was an engineer and businessman who discovered quite accidentally that his materialistic overview was incomplete.

Intelligent Design is anti-science, a doctrine whose proponents throw up their hands, "god must've done it". It is designed to fit into a pre-existing, rigid dogma. Vitalism is just a different 'lense' to examine the universe through, to apply the scientific method with.

Superficially, it seems that Evolution vs. Intelligent design is a simple case of Science vs. Religion.

But dig a little deeper, and things aren't so clear.

Evolution, as taught in schools today, is fundamentally based on a Materialistic philosophy. That is, the universe (all that is) is made up of physical, chemical and nuclear interactions.

The people pushing intelligent design for inclusion in schools (who were formerly pushing for creationism) are just trying to get something more compatible with their particular variety of Vitalism. Vitalism being, of course, the philosophy that the functions of a living organism are due to a vital principle distinct from physicochemical forces. Life is the non-material spark that animates cold hard matter.

So, the proponents of Intelligent Design are really just pushing for equal time.

Vitalism explains a lot - the ubiquity of the Near Death Experience (also: Out of Body Experiences), tribal religious tradtions (Native Americans leaving their tribe when they become a burden, so they could enter the spirit world directly), child prodigies, etc.

Some people (such as authors Robert Monroe, Ingo Swann, etc) also claim to Know that there's more than just the physical world out there. I can't make the same claim myself, but vitalistic philosophy explains some of my experiences better than anything else...

dood,

like Ingo Swann said at his little Q&A session at the Remote Viewing conference last summer: "We had to get results, right from the start". Ingo was one of the prime movers behind the government's 20-year long Stargate program, that investigated Remote Viewing for "psychic" spying. Do you think the government would've financed it for 20 years, when they could've given the pennies they spent on the program to Haliburton or Bechtel instead, if the $million or $10million a year hadn't bought them something?

http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/ - Mr. Swann's website

There are more things in heaven and earth, homer_ca, than are dreamt of in current "scientific" philosophy. (borrowing from Shakespeare). There is proof beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is something to occult phenomena, but only if you're willing to look (see Leadbeater's Occult Chemistry, for example).

And as for astrology, I refer you to a post of mine from a couple weeks ago. (I'm pretty sure the cyclical Mayan calendar is based on astrological principles).

You might want to read Ingo Swann. He has demonstrated Remote Viewing several times in a scientific setting. I'm not sure why this isn't better known.

We can't assume anything, we haven't met anybody else.

Yeah, 'cause CNN hasn't told us so.

Ingo Swann, founding member of the government-financed remote viewing program (ran for nearly 20 years, then dumped when the soviet union dissolved - "yeah, never worked, but we spent millions of dollars and twenty years finding that out". Ingo says gov't bureaucrats canceled the program because they were scared of being mind-read.) self published a book titled Penetration: The Question of Human and Extra-Terrestrial Telepathy... In it he talks about bases on the moon, human-ET interaction, etc. Why do you think NASA left multiple complete lunar missions on the ground?

From Ingo's perspective, suppression of the existence of ETs comes down to Power. To keep a hierarchical society, the majority of our species must be kept unaware of certain powers which are endemic to our species.

A more useful definition of "universe" is "the four-dimensional space-time manifold within which everything observable to human beings exists".

<sigh>

Try "the multi-dimensional ( including non-locality-or-Mind/Time/Space ) manifold within-which one reasonably consistent set of laws-of-physics resides", morelike.

If the Tibetan Buddhist maintain that there are 7 hidden dimensions ( can hold mind, cannot hold matter ), and the Toltecs independently discovered the same conclusion, and M-Theory came to approximately the same conclusion ( ~ at least 7, possibly more, hidden spacial dimensions ), then I'm betting that there actually are 7 or more hidden spacial dimensions.

Betting otherwise, after 3 absolutely-alien-to-each-other sciences perceived the same essence-structure, is, to me, prejudice only.

If Scientism holds that mind isn't in Universe ( and subject to laws-of-physics ) while maintaining that non-locality and entanglement are universal realities, that's hipocrisy ( so is "Scientism Knows that Knowing cannot exist: Therefore Scientism's Knowing is Right and all other Knowing is false, because Scientism is the only Authority" style reasoning ), and

Multiverse ( fer me ) means each Universe is its own 'bubble', no one of 'em making all/any other(s) non-exist, each 'bubble' having its own laws-of-physics.

My understanding is that there are 3 major dimensions, and numerous minor dimensions: Mind/Time/Space being the majors, Mind being broken down into 3 relatively-major and open subdimensions ( Toltec: 1st, 2nd, and 3rd attentions; Buddhist: gross-mind, subtle-mind, very-subtle-mind; Western: ego, deep-mind, soul ), Time maybe having one dimension, or maybe more, and Space having 3 relatively-major and open dimensions ( x/y/z ).

The near-symmetry between space and mind are so elegant: the Tibetan Buddhists and Toltecs hold that there are 7 hidden spacial dimensions, and the Tibetan Buddhists hold that there are 7 structures ( central-channel-wheels, or chakras ) of an autonomous-enough-to-realize mind. Interesting match with the 7 hidden spacial-dimensions that M-Theory apparently requires...

Why are there such symmetries?

The Magic Dismissal "Mere Coincidence" don't cut it for me, eh?

How about the Buddhist depiction of invariance ( 2000 or 2500 years before Einstein )?

If infinite-wisdom-mind is concentrating right there, and the observer is wisdom-nature contemplation, then the infinite-wisdom-mind one sees is red-shifted, being both orange-skinned and infinitely tranquil ( Manjushri ). If infinite-wisdom-mind is concentrating right there and the observer is ignorance-nature, then infinite-wisdom-mind one sees is blue-shifted, both blue-skinned and blazing violence and annihilation. Same infinite-wisdom-mind, different appearance, due to the mind of the observer, and the /red/-shift and /blue/-shift is right there in the t'anka paintings of 2?00 years ago.

Cripes, Ninja have seen mild versions of this same invariance, in their training, and I've seen the same strange apparent-difference-in-time-speed with a few ultra-total competitors...

Try this: ( and get the slashfuck spaces out from the URL, I can't get the system to allow the display of the link correctly )
http://www.biomindsuperpowers.com/Pages/MartialArt sAndSuperpowers.html

Whatever: concertedly ignoring evidence because it doesn't amplify one's assumptions'-position/importance within a cultural prejudice strikes me as doltish, and If Universe includes mind ( that we discuss indicates it does, for all except behaviourists ), then Universe is elegant indeed, and solving-one's-way-out makes sense to me...

Why do I offer stuff that doesn't assume as Standard Prejudice does?
Because I feel that everyone's autonomy is worth something, and the sciences that discovered invariance between Mind and Time are sciences of Mind. If they work, get results, are effective, then why not honestly try 'em rather than just mechanistically not doing so for habit's sake? Is habit worth more than my or your meaning or understanding?