Keep reading or not, this has to be something you are willing to experience, or it is not for you.
Again, you can only physically prove that you have the ability to control your consciousness when you're in a dream-state. I can (and plan on) practice meditation and control my mind to the point where I can have an OOBE. But as real as I know it may feel, it is a figment of my imagination that IS a part of my physical reality now. Certainly with all of the thousands of people 'experiencing' these alternate realities that are more complex than ours, one person should be capable of acquiring knowledge that can be applied to our physical universe.
And once again before you counter-argue, you cannot argue with logic within MBT. MBT has zero proof and zero evidence, it is false until proven true. You cannot argue with false facts.
Remote healing is another example of real world affects from nonphysical, but it would take personal experience again to be knowledge rather than belief. You have to have your own experiences, and not be so closed minded with your mind completely made-up before you really even know what many of us here are talking about.
This once again is just the 'experience it' argument. If remote healing were real, why would it not be adopted into modern medicine? Surely the power of healing with the mind would be the optimum way to heal somebody. It would be a closer step toward perfection, toward lower entropy. But that is not the case, because while there is a select group of people that claim to posses the ability to remotely heal, any wide spread or controlled tests must have been negative; or else this would have been a popular way of using medicine years ago.
Actually, in a sense, you have this all figured out. You are saying that it is all in our minds. Guess what? That is exactly what we say too. You say that it is just concepts and ideas. Guess what? We say that all that exists are concepts and ideas. You have simply not read enough yet to note the things that coming from the direction of MBT can show versus what QM and science in general cannot show. QM still talks about anomalies. Tom has explained many of those anomalies and in the general sense, all of them. Tom has explained how relativistic physics derives from the concepts of MBT as a necessary result. You have not noticed the links to research in various fields of science that fits right into the 'concepts and ideas' of MBT. Try looking in the third, reference, section at the bottom of the index page and checking out some of those threads. Cutting edge science and mathematics is gradually moving in the direction of the concepts and ideas of MBT.
To say that cutting edge science is moving in the way of MBT is nothing more than wishful thinking. Tom has developed a theory of consciousness that seems to "fit" when looked at from any perspective. This is great and I believe would take positive steps, in the field of philosophy and psychology
, not in science/everything. To first release a scientific theory ("breakthrough") that explains everything
in a book written for a layman further proves Tom's main motives and target audience. If he actually wanted to change the world and the way we look at science, the first objective would be scientifically proving his theory. If there were even one
tested and verifiable study proving MBT, scientists would certainly pick the idea up. It would be studied more, it would be widespread, it would grow, and it would become more profitable (lower entropy). Isn't that the goal?
QM is something we're trying to study physically, that's why it's respected. It's also why it differs from MBT. Tom (and you) would say that MBT can be experienced physically, thought about physically, and even tested physically (Hemi-Sync, remote viewing, traveling together)...why has it not been proven physically? These are the very reasons why MBT has been around for 7 or 8 years and seemingly no progress has been made to prove it.
It will never be possible to effectively comprehend the bigger reality (superset) from inside a smaller reality (subset) using concepts of a smaller reality.
Again, there is nothing remotely close to proof that a "bigger reality" exists. Furthermore, while I believe it's completely possible that a "bigger reality" exists, MBT is one theoretical way of explaining what it could possibly
be like. If MBT is the most factually complete and accurate theory to this, that is proof a larger reality does not exist. Because if you are able to experience both the large and small reality, you should be able to use larger reality techniques and demonstrate them in the smaller reality (ie. remote viewing). But you are not.
Think of Earth as a subset in our universe. Mankind was created and evolved on Earth, all a part of this biological system and subset with it's own unique rules, it's own unique atmosphere, etc. We could see the sky and the stars (the bigger reality), but could not prove them because they were impossibly far away. Humans created theories to describe what is out in that "Big Picture", and over time evolved to the point where we had the power to experience it. Once we experienced it, we proved it, verified it, and expanded the study of it. You can experience MBT and alternate realities, but you can nor prove or verify it, and that is the reason why it's not widely studied.
It should be possible to experience that bigger reality, but interpretations and descriptions will be limited and will be very individual and may often seem contradictory. That is why any attempts at creating proofs acceptable by masses are doomed. Because of that nothing is really certain and one of the best advices Tom gives is to learn how to live gracefully with uncertainty.
That is a complete cop-out excuse. Things are quite certain in our physical reality. Uncertainty exists, but it's not strong enough a force to really influence the way we live. If you put 10 people in a giant red room, bring them out, and ask them what color the room was...what would they say? Almost all would say "red". There are no interpretations, there is no other way to see it...it is red. Uncertainty might be that one of the persons is color-blind and therefore sees a different color. But that doesn't change the fact that almost everyone would say they were in a red room. If thousands of people experience these alternate realities, yes you would have some people that interpret it different. But in order for it to be a real system, the majority of people all must confirm and describe the exact same thing. If this were true it would be studied, documented, and proven. But it is not.
MBT is Tom's model of how things work that he created based on his direct experience and shared with us. You will have to have you own direct experiences that will enable you to make your own conclusions that very well may sound different once necessarily expressed using a human language and smaller reality concepts. And only through your own experience you can learn to differentiate between data (information) streams coming in to you from outside and the ones that you create yourself (your imagination).
You sum it up nicely right there. It's a personal belief and based on experience, not a scientific fact based on research. You use your imagination to create visions in your mind and explore them. What you don't understand is that your consciousness never actually leaves your physical body. Without your physical body, your consciousness does not exist. If it does, there should be a way to prove it.
My "argument" for MBT, if you can even call it that, has nothing to do with any concept within MBT. MBT simply explains my personal reality better than conventional science does.
Only if I'm deluded or mistaken or lying, does mainsteam science adequately explain the things I've experienced personally.
This again is nothing more than the 'experience' argument, and philosophy. Mainstream science supports the idea that you can consciously control your dreams with your brain. Paranormal activity is small uncertainties in our physical reality that people interpret differently with their minds. Just because you believe something paranormal happened does not mean that something paranormal happened. It means there was an uncertainty, fluctuation, anomaly, etc. in our physical reality...these things are random and that is the explanation. If there was a way to explain them, it would be proven.
Why form an opinion for or against MBT at this stage of your exploring? MBT is simply a model that we can refer to to help us better understand our own experiences. You could simply integrate components of it into your current truth and then leave those aspects you find unhelpful behind.
The trick is to remain open minded and sceptical. When you find that balance, you can literally cherry pick from each of the frameworks or beliefs you subscribe too - effectively building your own big TOE, which Tom has always advocated each of us do.
You do a perfect job at explaining exactly why this idea of MBT will never, ever be more than a failed theory. You're right, it is just a model that can help you better understand your experiences. Realize that this is nothing more than psychology and philosophy. It is NOT science, and it is NOT something that is a part of reality.
The universe has it's laws that we all have to follow. Tom claims the ability to transcend these laws, but has no way to prove it. Einstein would not be on the path Tom is now when trying to prove UFT/QM/uncertainty. Consciousness is an incredibly interesting field and deserves study, but not to prove a scientific theory of everything. Only for self-improvement and better understanding our physical consciousness/brain.
About the getting lost in dreams:Even if science has explained everything in the terms of a physical matter universe, this does not invalidate dreaming as a real experience.Dreaming is another 'dimension' of experience.
Dreaming is only possible if you're physically alive. It is another dimension of experience, but not another dimension of reality. When your body ceases to exist, you no longer have the ability to dream.
As for the remote viewing part: LOL... A quick 'parable' ,not from some assumed position of authority; but my own experience.When I was a young twenty something I was asleep at my girlfreind's apt. In a dream a phone rang-it was my grandfather in Philly "calling to say goodbye". When I woke there was a knock on the door-I knew that moment what it was about.
At the time it turned out that he was intubated and consciously sedated in an ICU 1,200 miles away. After we got to his bedside to say goodbye he died. None of this follows any scientific protocal; but it was a 'real' event in my consciousness. I had 2 witnesses to the conditions and had not known anything of his illness-it was a sudden, massive heart attack.
Coincidence and probability. But because how deeply personal it was to you, psychologically you interpret it as something different, something 'paranormal'. Literally billions of people dream every night, hundreds and hundreds of billions of dreams over years. It's just probability that a percentage of people happen to make a real life connection to their dream. Your connection just happened to be something personally monumental to you. Just as there is probability that a percentage of people experience this coincidence, there is a percentage within that percentage that will experience the coincidence over something major, like a death.
I 100% believe that what you explained happened to you. It was nothing paranormal though, just a very strange coincidence you had...just like thousands of other people. If they were more than just coincidences, they could be verified and proven scientifically.