Science & Human Transformation
Subtle Energies, Intentionality and Consciousness
Dr Tiller interview by Margaret Blackwell
May 23, 2005

Margaret Blackwell:            I wondered, first of all, what creativity is to you, if you have a definition of what it is.


Dr. William Tiller: Well, creativity is—a common definition, of course, is that it is what an individual does beyond the normal practice. And creativity involves the subconscious, accessing things from the universe that manifest in the conscious and the individual, at the conscious level, has to have given meaning and importance for that in their life and be in tune with these gifts from the unconscious. So part of that is an expression of the evolvement of the soul of the individual to increase the amplitude and broaden the spectrum of the subconscious outpourings into the world. I mean, I think that’s the path of evolution for all of us.


MB:         Yes.


WT:         That we manifest, we radiate more and more things in the world. We give meaning to more and more things and we radiate them with ever higher intensities as we become more capable. So I think it’s present in all individuals. It depends upon their willingness to express freely and beyond the bounds of what is presently conventional and accepted.


MB:         Right.


WT:         There is an addendum to that and that is that for, let’s call it creative expression to be fruitful in the world, it does involve discipline of the individual. So there is a component of discipline that helps to craft a creative expression into something useful and appreciated by the outside world. So it’s a complex issue, a very important one. And there are many, many facets to it.


MB:         Yes, I’ve got a lot of questions here about these different facets and I’d like to come back to this question of discipline later. When I first asked you to do this interview, you made a comment about feeling very strongly about the use of unfettered imagination, and I wondered where in your view imagination comes from?


WT:         Yeah, well, imagination, I think, comes from the flexibility in self —I’ve talked about it a bit in my writings. As you know, I tend to think of consciousness as a bi-product of spirit entering dense matter. And in order for spirit to enter dense matter, it has to have infrastructure to attach to, so that as an individual experiences life, and works at life to build self, in many, many ways, he/she becomes excellent in one’s craft, etc., then the more does spirit enter, and the more conscious does one become and now, the consciousness is such that you see possibilities far beyond what you earlier saw, and so you have more flexibility and you express things that could be called imagination -because they’re things outside of the norm. And, now, it isn’t that all of that occurs in one lifetime. It is a built up from many lifetimes because the soul self is able to imprint a lot of this onto the personality self. I mean, the geniuses that are born, like a Mozart or such, that capacity largely came about because of earlier lifetime experience, in my view.


MB:         You mean, other life experiences?


WT:         Other life experiences, yes. And so, imagination is really related to seeing more and more possibilities in things.


MB:         What do you think are the necessary conditions for people to be able to use their unfettered imagination are?


WT:         Well, I think certainly one of the conditions is that you’re not fearful. In certain cultures in historical times, you express certain things from your imagination and they might burn you at the stake.


MB:         Right.


WT:         And so there is that. And then there are the expressions of your peer group to appreciate or not appreciate. So, often to do this, you have to be deeply enough committed to that aspect of yourself that you do things in spite of your peer group’s affirmation. And then it also relates to how much you’re in touch with yourself. For example, the old dictum, ‘to thine own self be true’ is really important here. And I know that when in the 1970 experience period, when I was looking at psychoenergetics and felt someone really needed to seriously work on this who had scientific training, I came to the conclusion it had to be me and I had to stand up for this because in order to be true to myself, because I believed in it, I had no other choice. And so it led me to do various things that people said were very courageous, but in actual fact, it was just simply following the dictum of ‘to thine own self be true.’


MB:         …………but it does take courage to do that.


WT: Well yes, but it also takes a kind of knowing that if you don’t do it, you really constrain and partially destroy yourself. So it’s a two edged thing.


MB:         That’s a great example. I wanted to ask you how you see the relationship between creativity and perception……which I know is a huge question?


WT:         Perception. Yes, well, again I go back to the statement of spirit entering dense matter gives rise to consciousness and consciousness deals very much with perception. Perception is very much a part of consciousness. To perceive something that perhaps others don’t perceive. And again, it’s part of this flexibility that develops, that you perceive things that are not in the norm because you’re more conscious. It’s as if you’re standing on a higher hill and you can see further. Now, that’s one aspect. In my own case, when I developed the first model of this multi-dimensional universe that would allow psychoenergetic phenomena to potentially naturally coexist with conventional scientific phenomena, I did it through daily meditation for six months working for the rest of the day on those perceptions that came from meditation. It took discipline. It took being open to that pathway.


MB:         Were you the only person doing this at that time, the only scientist?


WT:         Yes, I think so.


MB:         So you really broke new ground?


WT:         And Jean and I sat together in meditation for an hour each day, and you’ll see I write that experience in chapter one of the new book, Some Science Adventures with Real Magic, so you’ll see more about that. But basically where it comes to creativity, in this case, it was continuing then to be disciplined, to make changes in the life to provide time to work in this area, and to do theory and to do experimenting and to look within and continue to develop these aspects of self. They were all part of that and that has led to many, many creative expressions, but it took all of it, along that pathway.

                Now, as a younger person, of course, I was creative in both dimensions of science—because I started out as a poet.


MB:         Oh, you did?


WT:         Yes, as a young man. As a teenager, and of course, I think Jean fell in love with me because I was a poet, and she was really disappointed when I became a scientist.


MB:         (Laughs) Do you write poetry now?


WT:         No, I gave it up. I gave it up in my 20s. The flow of words gave me more power over people than I really should have at that time. And so I set that aspect of it aside until I was mature enough and wise enough to be able to handle it properly.


MB:         What drew you to being a scientist?


WT:         Well, once I decided I wanted to learn, I was always good in math and science, as I was in English. And I decided that if I became a writer, I could never be a scientist, because I would not have learned the scales. If you don’t learn the scales, you can’t write the symphony. But if I became a scientist, I may one day be able to be a writer.


MB:         Oh, so it was very conscious.


WT:         So it was—I thought it was my decision and maybe it was, but in any event, that’s how it unfolded.


MB:         Interesting.


WT:         And so, I took the most difficult course, Engineering Physics at the University of Toronto, because I didn’t know quite what direction I was going in and I wanted to make sure I had the best foundation. So that’s how it all unfolded.


MB:         Do you see yourself writing poetry again in the future?


WT:         I do. I do. Maybe a decade down the road. I don’t see it in the immediate future. I’m still fulfilling this prime task I set myself for this lifetime. Maybe that will never be finished. But that is to build a reliable bridge of understanding that connects seamlessly with conventional scientific understanding and extends through the territory of psycho-energetic phenomena and the domains of emotion, plus the domains of mind and gets firmly planted in the bedrock of spirit on the other side, and that it be strong enough that people will walk across it.


MB:         That’s very exciting!


WT:         That’s my goal. That’s really what I’m trying to do. So if I reach the point where I have built aspects of the bridge well enough for both the general public and for the scientific community to step forth and participate, then maybe indeed, I will spend more time trying to divert some of these things into poetic essence and phrase them in ways that can lift people. We’ll see.

But poetry was a different mode of expression - and I see a lot of poetry now in the work that I’m writing about what I’m doing. But again, it’s this business of having developed a lot of infrastructure in the self, of spirit entering and then being more conscious, and being more conscious, you have the possibility of being more creative because you have the possibility of thinking you see further and then if you discipline yourself to craft things needed, to convert those perceptions into an actual, a serious embodiment of creativity, I mean all of those things are necessary parts of the process.


MB:         I think it’s very interesting, this question of embodiment.


WT:         I think it is, the point is many people are creative but they’re not disciplined enough to embody that essence into a form that is an entity unto itself.


MB:         I think also some of the things that people make, even though they might put them into a form, the form they put them into doesn’t end up being an embodiment. It ends up being a representation and I think there’s quite a difference between these two.


WT:         I think there is a difference in that. I think, as you probably know, that to me we are all spirits having a physical experience as we ride the river of life together. And that our spiritual parents dressed us in these biobodysuits and put us in this playpen that we call the universe in order to develop our gifts of intentionality, in order to really see more deeply into ourselves and into nature and in order to become what we were intended to become which is co-creators with our spiritual parents. And so the whole issue of living is creating. It’s learning how to create and learning how to embody that creation with richer and richer essences. It’s a training program so that ultimately, with our spiritual parents in co-creatorship, to spin worlds out of ourselves. I mean, that’s where we’re all going.


MB:         That’s a beautiful way of seeing it. I guess I was thinking of it in a different way. I was thinking of the question of embodiment, for example, in say, the icons that are painted in Russia, where people have to train for ten years before they can paint them, and part of that is the skills and using the gold leaf and all of that, but the main piece is they have to be spiritually developed because the icon is seen as an actual embodiment of—


WT:         That’s an outer part of it, but the inner part of it is that it’s embodied with radiances from deeper dimensions of the universe. So it has a feeling nature to it which is quite remarkable and quite sacred, and it can be felt - so this aspect of embodiment is part. I mean, you can embody it in many ways, but the level to which you do it is dependent upon your mastery and your appreciation of these different levels. I mean, for myself, when I wrote Science and Human Transformation, it was a joy to sit and write it, because I felt I was communing with the unseen, and when it was finished and printed, I felt it had an essence from the unseen that was unseen but people could feel it.


MB:         Is that what you meant when you said to me once about that book, you thought they potentiated it?


WT:         Yes, that’s exactly what I meant when I said that. And this, of course, is what all of us can do as we create in the world we embody, we touch these things and embrace these things with the deeper energies of ourselves, those that we allow to flow through us. Let’s just say to potentiate because that’s a clearer word, I think, another dimensional aspect of this creation. And I suspect that there are a variety of paintings around the world in museums that that is there. That’s why they glow especially, etc. And people likewise. Because we all radiate what we are.


MB:         Throughout your book, Science and Human Transformation, there’s evidence that you use yourself and your own experience and your own life as part of your experiments and I wanted to ask you about this. One thing I remember particularly you told me about was when you had an interest in finding out whether you could train yourself to see auras. You said you didn’t particularly care to be able to have the skill but you just wanted to see if you could learn how to do it and then you went for it.


WT:         Yes, exactly.


MB:         There are quite a lot of references in your book about ways that you use your own body and your own life as part of your scientific discoveries and experiments.


WT:         Because if I can do it, others can do it. I mean, that was the issue behind it all, and I just wanted to see if it was easy enough for me to do, then others could do it. And I found, of course, the more you do some of these things, the more you strengthen them. You build the muscles. You know, we have outer muscles. These are inner muscles.


MB:         There’s one place where you write about discipline, and you write about the way that logic and intuition work together in creative processes.


WT:         Yes, and indeed, I think it was perhaps the metaphor of modeling clay - basically that the intuition is really powerful to get an initial impression or pattern that you want to display, and then the knowledge and the skill of your craft, the level of your excellence does work with that clay in detail and shapes it, so that, in my case, it’s internally self-consistent science, consistent with other science, but it has this beginning clarity of a work, of a—you almost see a completed work. You don’t see it perfectly but you see essential outlines.


MB:         That’s very interesting - because another thing I wanted to ask you about was not knowing, the thing that seems to me the most important prerequisite for creative action of any kind is the readiness not to know. And I’ve found when I’ve been teaching people, that sometimes they would get very dismayed and disillusioned because they had an idea in their head of exactly something they wanted to create, and what they created didn’t match up to that. Often what they actually created was better than their original idea, and because they were so bound by their idea, they couldn’t see what they had created.


WT:         Yes, that very definitely happens and I think it’s important to recognize all of these features and come to a sense of equilibrium with respect to them.


MB:         What would that mean? The equilibrium?


WT:         Being at peace. And the issue that I feel is important in so much of us, because we’re mostly unconscious, is in the articulation and discrimination of thoughts and ideas. And it is that first stage of you have a feeling and to be able to precipitate it into some space-time-form, whether it’s writing or whether it’s a piece of art or whether it’s a sculpture, whatever it is, that’s the first crucial step, to sort of pull it up out of yourself so it can be seen in some form, and then you can whittle with it. You have a feeling of what it is you really want to do and now you begin to understand it. And then comes all your craft to convert it into as excellent a piece of your expression as you can.


MB:         I’d just like to come back to the not knowing - you made a comment to me about not knowing and the unseen, and you said something about your work, that you do all you can and then leave it to the unseen.


WT:         Yes, yes, basically and this is a thing that occurs over time, if you have an inkling and you make this beginning, precipitation and you take it as far as you can, if you’re impatient, you can push it into an unsatisfactory result. But if you develop the patience to like what you’re doing and what form it’s taking, but you don’t see where to go next, then that’s the time to pause and reflect and allow other processes to occur and these are generally unseen. And so implicit in coming to that level of perception is that always, always, always, always, there is much, much more than we perceive. The universe is much richer than we perceive, than we know and probably that we can know, at least at this stage of our development as a species. And if you allow those processes to work, then you, by attuning, and again, giving meaning to this part of things, then you have co-creatorship and—


MB:         With whom and what?


WT:         With the unseen. And you accept and allow guidance which you must discriminate and it has to meet certain standards and qualities, etc., you don’t do it alone but you partner in creating something of value


MB:         How would you see the unseen, how would you see, in, say, in the writing of poetry, for example, how would you see the unseen?


WT:         Well, the unseen, to me, it’s a question of the level that you reach. There are many, many levels. There are levels of the unseen. You’re now talking about the huge numbers of souls at various levels in the hierarchy, spiritual hierarchy, that are not in embodiment. But they’re still working. They’re creating and they have purposes and they are trying to help the evolution of species on this planet and other planets and they are part of this life process. They just don’t happen to be embodied. And so if you are open to the possible assistance and guidance, then that can happen.


MB:         So they could be actually part of the creation of a poem, for example. Is that what you’re saying? I remember reading an interview with Alice Walker, who wrote the book The Color Purple and she went away to some farmhouse somewhere for a few months, to write the book, and she started to hear the voices of her characters – they started to speak to her and to each other. And her whole story came from that.


WT:         Right. And I’ve heard of that kind of thing. And of course, the capacity for humans to hear and to see beyond the norm, there’s lots and lots of experience in that. Certainly, in my own case, I don’t really see or hear, except you know in the experiment, that I did to teach myself to see auras, then I did see something beyond the norm. But once I had convinced myself that it was real and that I was able to do it, and therefore others could do it, I just let it decay as a capacity, because I had other purposes that I had to put my time to and I didn’t want to be distracted. I basically think it possible to manifest and actualize all these gifts that we call super-natural abilities. But I don’t want them to manifest in myself unless they serve the larger purpose because they could be distractions to me.


MB:         So just coming back to what you said about these spirits


WT:         Yes?


MB:         So in all these spirits that are out there, is it the case that some are good and some are bad, or some are very good and very bad, or there’s a spectrum?


WT:         I think there’s a whole hierarchy and the question of what do you mean by good or bad?


MB:         Well I mean, well-intentioned.


WT:         They may be immature, and they may be mature. They may have narrow objectives of their own or they may have large objectives for the species—those are the issues. So good and bad are too narrow a description, I think, for this kind of thing, and so it becomes part of ourselves, you can reach—how high do you wish to reach is the issue. I mean, lots of people start hearing voices, and some of them are not very good. But it’s the level where the individual is, and they often have allowed that to occur, but it didn’t need to occur. They could have reached higher if they were conscious enough to reach higher.


MB:         It’s interesting. Because I remember Andrew Cohen said once, that a lot of people think if somebody is channeling a spirit, they just automatically assume because they’re being channeled that the spirit is good and wise. And that’s actually not necessarily the case and that discrimination is really necessary there as it is in any other place.


WT:         Absolutely. Absolutely. I mean I’ve worked with a lot of such people over the years and there’s a lot of garbage. Discrimination is really important. But the point is, it’s like a series of atomic energy levels. These are all possibilities. There’s a ground state but there are higher states and there are different properties associated with higher states and so if you take the same attitude of mind about the unseen, there are many, many, many, many levels and it is really best to seek the highest level that you can work with within yourself. You’ve built yourself to a level where the thoughts are—they can integrate with your normal spectrum.


MB:         That makes sense.


WT:         If you reach too high, you just can’t connect because it’s beyond your spectrum and there’s no way to put it in your picture. Conversely, if you are indulgent with yourself, or if you are addicted to things, you may reach levels that just strengthen that addiction, etc. So, you know, it’s sort of a psychic thicket. I mean, all of these things are part of us becoming more conscious and developing these other aspects of ourselves. But one needs to approach these things very carefully. One can be trapped in the forest of psychism for a long, long time.


MB:         That sounds pretty horrifying!


WT:         So again, it comes back to discrimination. It comes back to faith. It comes back to, you know, by their fruits you shall know them. And the way you know yourself is what fruits are you creating? We’re talking about creativity. Okay. Now that’s the intention, is to create. All right. Now, create and then see how is that creation appreciated by others, by yourself, etc. What did you put into it? What have you built?


MB:         I want to come back to this whole question of intentionality because so much of your work focuses around that.


WT:         Right. It’s crucial.


MB:         There’s one thing you said in Science and Human Transformation that every application of our intention is an act of creation, and then you talk about the importance of using our intention effectively. So I wanted to ask you about that because you are obviously talking about your own inner intention but also in the devices that you make and that you made for me, the intention in terms of the electronic device is also working with intention, so I wanted to ask you about the whole question of intention.


WT:         Well, certainly from the experience we’ve had in the period from ’97 to 2000 this was where we did the experiments, the first significant experiments with imprinting intention into a device, and then that manifested into Conscious Acts of Creation, The Emergence of A New Physics. And then, this more recent phase that was continuing that theme but it was necessary to prove replicability and it was necessary to have others do it. Now, I broke the replicability down into two parts. One part was that we would provide the IHDs (intention host device) for particular experiments and then others, in their laboratories, would do the experiment that that device was, let’s say, tuned for. And we did the four sites in the U.S. and then two sites in Europe. And so we showed that we could get replicability of people doing the experiment with the increasing the pH of purified water by 1 pH unit, provided they followed the protocols and used the equipment that we suggested for them to put together.


MB:         That’s a pretty dramatic thing to achieve, isn’t it?


WT:         It was a very dramatic thing to achieve, and the issue, of course, was the unstated assumption of science in this present paradigm and in the previous classical mechanics paradigm that no human qualities of consciousness, intention, emotion, mind, or spirit can significantly influence a well-designed target experiment in the physical reality. And so then our goal was to set up several target experiments in the physical reality and to imprint devices with an intention and we decided to do it in a way that was nice and clean, scientifically. That is, to embed them into a device and that device then acted as a surrogate to allow this to happen. And we learned that the precursor was that the device outputted something related to consciousness into that space and that conditioned that space to some higher level of reality which some of the experiments connected that to the electro-magnetic gauge symmetry level of the space. And then we tuned it for a particular target experiment – changing the water pH; increasing the thermodynamic activity of a specific liver enzyme; increasing the ATP to ADP radio in the cells of fruit fly larva so they’d be more fit and have a shortened larval development time to the adult life stage. And so we achieved all of these things very significantly and so that basically said that the unstated assumption of establishment science was just very, very wrong. It was wrong. 

And then we found, when we did the replication experiment, it could be done, but we found that we had also set up control sites with no device, first just two to twenty miles away from the site of where the device was. And we found that we got the same kind of behavior there. And then we took two sites—we started them as control sites and they were 1-2,000 miles away from the three sites where we had the IHDs and we found that the same imprint developed there, but it took the order of a month or two months.


MB:         So are you saying that the control site used an IHD but—


WT:         No, there were no IHDs at the control sites. That’s why we called them control sites. We wanted to see what the results would be, but the fact is, when they were two to twenty miles away, we found we got the same kind of behavior. Okay?


MB:         That’s incredible!


WT:         Yes! I should have realized that would happen, because at the very beginning, when we imprinted a device, we took two devices that were physically identical - we set one aside as a control device and the other one we imprinted from this deep meditative state. We did the experiment of separating them by about 100 meters and turning them off electrically to see if they were isolated. Why we chose to do that experiment I can’t remember, but again, it was one of those things I just thought that we needed to do. It was my intuition, not knowing why, and we found that within three to five days, the imprint passed from the imprinted device to the unimprinted device.


MB:         And they were switched off?


WT:         They were switched off, so an electromagnetic carrier wave was not the way in which it was transferred. Well, first of all, it was a problem. We had to find a way to shield a little bit, but instead, on reflection we realized that there is another information channel in the universe that we don’t know anything about and this information passed from one device to the other. So we then wrapped the device in aluminum foil and stored it in an electrically grounded Faraday cage and therefore, we were able to keep the imprint intention in the device for the order of three to four months so we could do experiments then. But when we did the replication experiment, I’d forgotten all about that stuff, and then, we found that the control sites picked up this information and so we had information entanglement between the device site and the control site, first over two to twenty miles, and then over 1,500, a thousand, two thousand miles. And ultimately, we had sites start in the U.K., near London, and in Milan, Italy, by two groups of people whom I had never met, but who wanted to do some of this work, and we just told them what to do and said, all right you gather background data for three months and then we’ll send you an IHD. Well, in England, in three weeks, the pH had gone up one pH unit and in Milan, in one week, it went up 1.7 pH units.


MB:         Oh, my goodness!


WT:         But that was, in Milan, it was below ground and we had another control site here in Missouri that was below ground. And in that case, it also went to 1.7 pH units.


MB:         So the original experiment with the IHD was one unit?


WT:         It was one unit. And we found that those sites that were at ground level, the pH went up one pH unit. Those sites that were below ground, they went up 1.7. Those sites that were three stories up in the air, as they were in Bethesda and Baltimore, they only went up 0.8 units, which suggests that whatever this energy is, it prefers to go through the ground rather than through the air. Electromagnetism prefers to go through the air than through the ground.


MB:         Oh, that’s very interesting.


WT:         It was very interesting.


MB:         And in the replication experiment, in the control sites, did you actually say there was no IHD?


WT:         There was never an IHD at any control site.


MB:         So they did the experiment exactly the same, but without an IHD?


WT:         Right, exactly, because then we would see what happens at a control site. We thought it would behave, you know, when you think of things just in the terms of space-time, you think there’s no interaction. But in essence, once you condition a space, our experiments show that we are accessing another level of reality that is the vacuum level in reality. So basically, our experiments showed that we were accessing not the atom molecule level of reality but actually that we were accessing the vacuum level of reality. The vacuum level of reality is the space between the fundamental particles making up the atoms and molecules. It’s mostly empty space and so we called that the coarse physical vacuum. And in that, from our theoretical work, I proposed a long time ago from this meditative state back in the early ‘70s, that that domain was a frequency domain and because it was a frequency domain, then it meant that once the pattern was there, it was everywhere. It wasn’t limited by space and time.


MB:         That’s remarkable!


WT:         And that appeared, from our present understanding at the moment, our working hypothesis is that this information entanglement over these huge distances really occurs by building the conjugate of the direct space, the atom/molecule level, object and intention. You build it into this frequency domain, the vacuum level of reality, and therefore it is everywhere and so, with the equipment 6,000 miles away, at the atom/molecule level is, now the imprint, once it goes in the vacuum level, it can, because the equipment is there in the atom molecule level, it can now build a coupling at that point between these two levels of the universe.


MB:         When you say the equipment is there, what does that mean?


WT:         Well, we asked them to set up the pH measuring equipment and to measure the temperature. It was what we used in our own laboratories, so that that was part of the protocol for this experiment and, in essence, it turned out that every site was involved in the experiment. Between the device sites and the control sites, we ended up with ten different locations where we got the same kind of results, and during that period, we also invented a device which allowed us to measure the thermodynamic energy change of that space, relative to our normal atom/molecule world, which is called the U[1] electromagnetic gauge symmetry world where Maxwell’s electromagnetic equations function, etc.

                So it was all very interesting and from all of that, we have on the one hand, an information source which conditioned the space to this higher level where it can couple. The atom molecule level can couple to the vacuum level. And so now, we begin to have opened a door to a new level of physics and we also have a detector which is able to tell us how great is this coupling to this other level of reality and what are the consequences energetically, etc.


MB:         It’s completely mind-boggling! Because it works at such great distances and there’s no device in the control sites, does this mean that actually you could randomly set up a control site anywhere, literally anywhere and the same thing would happen?


WT:         I think so. As long as you follow certain protocols, yes.


MB:         That’s remarkable.


WT:         And some people from India have asked me to cooperate to do that there and ultimately I’m sure someone from Australia will ask and we’ll see at least with this planet, that that will occur, and it can probably occur with other planets. We’re dealing with a new energy here. And it is an energy that is malleable to human thought.


MB:         What does that mean exactly?


WT:         What it means, is you see, when we imprint the devices, the IHDs, the results show that this new energy is what’s causing it to happen. And the experimental results are that we get the specific results of the intention. That is that we get the water pH going up, if we’ve intended it to go up. We get it going down if we’ve intended it to go down. But if we are using the down one, it doesn’t go up. It goes down. And if we then go to the other, the biological experiments, those don’t do the pH up or down. They do the biological experiments and vice versa. So there is an intelligence in these things which have them do what was the intention. And so, since in essence, it’s all happening via this new energy, which I think of as probably the spectrum of chi, then it is the intention that modulates it much as in our own experience. We take electromagnetic waves and we now have learned how to put audio information on them, learned how to put video information on them. We know how to project them through space-time. And we know how to restore these things in our television sets or our radios.

                So I’m saying the same sort of thing will occur with this other energy in our future. And, but the information that ripples it, or can ripple it is aspects of mind, intention, spirit. So—


MB:         So the implications of this are huge! Also, what did you mean when you said that this could occur with other planets?


WT:         Well, basically, the information entanglement - we first saw it as being at 100 yards. And then we saw it at two miles to twenty miles for the control sites, and then we saw it at between a thousand and two thousand miles. These were Bethesda and Baltimore relative to Kansas, Missouri, and Payson, Arizona. And then, the outreach went to the U.K. and Milan, so that was 6,000 miles from Payson. And then, the implication from everything that we’ve had is that there didn’t appear to be any particular distance limit. In fact, it was taking less time for the system - the remote site - to reach its maximum pH effect, and it became clear that the enthusiasm of the site operators was also a factor. If they were positively enthusiastic about it, it occurred much more quickly.

And then, from that the implication or the working hypothesis was that it could be from one planet to another. So, I mean, that’s within the framework of understanding that if you’re talking about a phenomenon functioning in a domain whose natural referent coordinates are frequencies, then they don’t appear to be in any way limited by distance or time. And just as in relativity theory, we have found in our case that time is included in the mathematics as a fourth distance, and the way you do that is that you convert the time to a distance. We’ll call it x4 of four, the four distance coordinates, and that’s just equal to i, the imaginary symbol which means the square root of minus one, times c, the velocity of light, times time. So c converts time to a distance, because c is centimeters per second times seconds. And the seconds just cancel out. So it becomes an imaginary distance.


MB:         Wow!


WT:         So, and since in relativity theory, that term enters always as the square, then it becomes a mathematically real quantity - just becomes minus, x4 squared. Anyway, that’s what’s behind that aspect.


MB:         The whole concept of it is pretty mind-boggling.


WT:         Well, I think the thing that is important is, for us to realize that as we then progress to higher dimensions in the universe, you see, they can all be frequencies. They can be bands of frequencies, different bands. And that means they all function everywhere. So space-time is just a particular classroom of consciousness where the deeper reality is all in the domain of frequencies.


MB:         I don’t have much of a grasp for physics, but I have a sense of what you’re talking about and it’s very radical.


WT:         It is radical, but it allows us to embrace all of the qualities of humanity that we think of or biological systems, in terms of emotions and mind and spirit and things that heretofore we had no way of tying them down to something that we could deal with in a practical way. Now there is a possibility of doing that.


MB:         That’s huge.


WT:         Yes, it is. And eventually people will understand. They will indeed come to see themselves, the majority of themselves anyway, as being an organism that is everywhere in the universe potentially. And it’s only at one level of ourselves that we’re localized in space-time.


MB:         Isn’t that a scientific explanation and description of nonduality and nonseparation?


WT:         Yes, yes. It all comes out of this kind of thing. I mean, it potentially does. Okay, these are my working hypotheses. This is the first, I would say, serious attempt at providing a frame of reference for looking at nature which allows nature to express itself at all these various levels. And it doesn’t mean that ultimately it’s exactly correct, but it is at least a significant start. It changes the way we look at everything.


MB:         So just to come back to the device that we’ve been working with together to try and cure Parkinson’ Disease. I’m very interested - in terms of intentionality - in the whole question of how this relates to the use of human intention to heal, either with or without an IHD.


WT:         It’s very similar because basically, in India, at this point in time, I am told that groups are taking swamis trained in inner work, the development of themselves and they are holding intentions and causing things to happen, much as we are doing with these devices.


MB:         When I asked you about the IHD you made for me, to attempt to cure the Parkinson’s, I asked you why couldn’t the human being, i.e. me or any human being, have that intention themselves?


WT:         Well, they can. I mean, the point is, it’s a question of what is their level of inner development. How much have they built those muscles inside?


MB:         So you said that in most human beings, there’s too much fluctuation of intention.


WT:         Yes. I think so. Most people don’t believe they really can do it because they have unconsciously swallowed the unstated assumption of conventional science, that people can’t do that. But people can. But to be reliable, they have to work at it. They have to discipline themselves.


MB:         So that means it should be possible for me to cure my Parkinson’s.


WT:         But maybe not in this lifetime. I mean, the point is, you do what you can do, but you may not get far enough in one lifetime to be able to do it. But you may. The point is, if you elicit help from the unseen, as we think we’re doing, then you get a much bigger impact.


MB:         What do you mean, as we think we’re doing?


WT:         Well, I mean, I have talked to you about this and I have felt all along that when we sit to imprint, we try to be perfect channels for information from the higher levels of nature to flow through us into the device. And I tend to think that the unseen is doing the heavy lifting. I mean, when we sit to imprint, we feel as if we have colleagues doing it. I mean, we feel them. So, to what degree? We just don’t know enough yet to be able to separate all these particular issues. But I think of it as a co-creation effort with the unseen.


MB:         In terms of the IHDs that you’ve done for me over the last year,  they’ve had a certain amount of effect, but haven’t gone as far as we’d hoped. What does that mean? Does that mean that I in some way haven’t—


WT:         I don’t know. I mean, the point is, I don’t know. You know, experiments are like that and whether in the scheme of things, we’re not ready to take such a big step, but I have felt that these devices have helped you alter yourself in ways that are not necessarily visible.


MB:         Definitely.


WT:         And make you ready for whatever your next step is.


MB:         Yes, I’m sure that’s definitely been true.


WT:         I think it has. Well, you know, it isn’t my intent, although I had a lot of that in the beginning, to achieve this great thing quickly. But in the—


MB:         When you say this great thing, what does that mean?


WT:         I mean, cure your Parkinson’s. All the way, I mean, you know, all the wonderful magical things. You would run a four-minute mile and etc., etc. But the issue is, what is important is that your soul and personality self evolve in a way that’s best for you. And I don’t fully know what that is. But I have always been willing to have that be the outcome, rather than this superman kind of outcome.


MB:         Yes, that’s more important to me, too.


WT:         So, you know, it’s an experiment and I learn from these experiments. We all learn. And there is a timing in things. I mean, this procedure has shown great promise. I think it will show even greater promise.


MB:         I’m sure.


WT:         There’s more to be learned and there is a timing.


MB:         Yes. I wanted to go on to the next question which I think is related to this. It’s a question about space and density.


WT:         Space and density?


MB:         Yes. In my investigations about creativity, I keep encountering this question of space and density in relationship to creativity in all sorts of different ways. So one experience of this is with my osteopathic physician whom you’ve talked with. He has a very full understanding and grasp and knowledge of the structures of body, you know, the muscles, the tissues, the ligaments, all that, but where he works is really in the space between them. And he has said to me things like, “Stop buying into the density of matter. Stop buying into the density of your body. It’s not true. Finding the space is not a make-believe thing.” And one time, he had a student there and he was treating me and working with the student, and he said to the student,  “Find the space. That’s where the healing force is.” And I said to him later, “How can I do that so that I can work on healing myself?” And he said, “You have to get smaller and smaller and smaller until you’re so small you won’t bump into anything.”

When I asked him what would I bump into, he explained that it’s a question of occupying the space in between the nucleus and the electrons orbiting—


WT:         Which I am saying is the space of the coarse physical vacuum.


MB:         What does that mean? So are the space and the vacuum the same thing?


WT:         Yes. Exactly. It is the same thing, and then of course, in the book Science and Human Transformation, I do refer to the work that Leadbeater and some others have done a long time ago with the Theosophical Society to indeed shrink themselves, their consciousness down to the fundamental particle levels and actually see the structures at that level and be able to describe it and draw it and so forth. That’s one of the siddhis.


MB:         When I was experimenting with doing it, I found it very difficult to get smaller, but I realized that when I do tai chi, and I do the reaching up to the sky and down to the earth, and out to the horizon in the four directions, that I can have that experience of disappearing then and so I said “well can do it getting bigger, but I can’t do it getting smaller.’ And he said, “Oh, that’s the same thing.” And then I have, sometimes, especially when he’s been working on me, been able to go into that space and reside in it.


WT:         Let me just interject. That’s the space where intention works.


MB:         Oh, that’s interesting. When he’s working on me, he knows when I’m in the space and when I’m not. So when I move from not being in it to get into it, he will immediately say, “Oh, good. You got there.”  He’s so connected to what I’m doing, because obviously there’s no physical example of it. So that’s where the intention is.


WT:         Right. In essence, that’s the level where this new energy is that I talked about, where it functions. That’s the level where chi functions. That’s the level where all the psychoenergetic processes function. And that energy is what becomes modulated by intention. So it’s understandable that intention is working in that aspect of space.


MB:         I’m interested in this question of space and density in relationship to creativity. I was talking with a woman who is a cellist. She was trained by Pablo Casals and played in his chamber orchestra and she also teaches at Julliard. I was asking her about creativity and the question of space came up with her because she said when she’s teaching music she’s teaching her students how to sculpt the silence, which seems to me to be the same thing as the space.


WT:         Indeed. People talk about going to the void where you create. I mean, basically that’s what we do in the meditative state when we are going to imprint a device. We move ourselves into that domain.


MB:         Oh, that’s interesting. So I’m interested in the question of the edges, the relationship between the density and the space. Is there a spectrum of movement from one to the other?


WT:         Okay, think of it this way. You have the picture in your mind of a classical picture of an electric atom?


MB:         Is that with the electrons spinning?


WT:         Electrons spinning, moving around in a kind of solar system pattern. And so now, what you have in a coarse physical vacuum which occurs in a space between these things, is another construct which I think probably goes faster than light. Therefore it can easily move out of the way of moving electrons because it moves so fast. But think now of another kind of planetary system that would be moving. And so now it becomes a more complex dance. All right? And then think of the deltrons as being more closely allied with the orbits of stuff that I just mentioned -


MB:         What are the deltrons?


WT:         The deltron is this particle from the domain of emotion in my theoretical modeling that is not constrained by relativity theory and can go faster than light as well as slower than light. So on the one end, it can interact with electric substance which all is constrained to go slower than light, but can also interact with the reciprocal space substance’s magnetic wave-like substance which we postulate all travels faster than light. And therefore, it can allow them to interact with each other when they can’t interact with each other without that coupling medium.


MB:         When you say allow them to interact with each other, what’s the them?


WT:         The electric stuff going slower than light, the magnetic stuff going faster than light.


MB:         Okay.


WT:         The deltrons allow coupling to occur between them. You think of these things as each having a little halo around it of deltrons. And therefore, the interaction between these two things in time, one kind of thing inside one set of halos, and the other, inside another set of halos and the interaction now is between the deltron halos.


MB:         And the deltrons are the halos?


WT:         The deltrons are the halos, yes. And so long as they have interaction, but they’re already interacting with this other stuff in their core level, within, then it means that the slower than light stuff is interacting with the faster than light stuff.


MB:         Wow!


WT:         So that allows the whole system to do this dance. Okay?  So you can begin to see that it becomes more and more complex as a structure. So when you talk about space, now you see what you’re doing is you’re beginning to fill the space. Well, generally, these things are so small and they’re traveling so fast that they’re still mostly empty space all the time. But now the stuff moving in that space is more dynamic and more complex. And that’s where we’re going in the next step of science, the next major step of science will be to study this next layer of stuff which you can interact with, with consciousness.


MB:         So is that when I asked about the edge—


WT:         Yes. So now, you see the edge is—the pictures that we have to use to describe this, they’re really a space-time picture. All right? But they function in a frequency domain which means they’re everywhere. The pattern is reproduced everywhere in space-time. But it’s a pattern in a frequency domain. That whole concept is something that we have to grow accustomed to before we really, really understand it.


MB:         I see.


WT:         But that’s the aspect, you see, that when we move to talk about the spiritual side of ourselves, that’s another level of this stuff, okay, which, we postulate is even finer and travels even faster, and it’s all involved in this divine dance. But it’s everywhere in essence. It’s not limited at all by distance and time. The only place that that comes in is because we still have to use that procedure for making a mental image. Our mental images are all in space-time because that’s what we were born into. That’s what we learned and that’s how our brains got constructed.


MB:         So I know the experience of working with this doctor that I mentioned was that  there was no difference between the space inside my body and the space outside my body, right up through to the galaxies and everything. And that sounds like the same as what you’re saying.


WT:         Right. Yes, in a frequency domain you see there’s no difference.


MB:         So that probably leads to my next question, which is what is the relationship between creativity and love.


WT:         Ah. Well, love is the creative force, in my view.


MB:         That’s a beautiful way of describing it.


WT:         And so, if you’re creating, you are expressing love.


MB:         Do you think that’s true of everybody?


WT:         Yes.


MB:         Even when something destructive is being created?


WT:         Well, the issue, I mean, love is much, much more complex than we understand. We only see a certain aspect of it. Just like consciousness, is much, much more complex than we understand. So, we first have to work our way through consciousness before we can begin to appreciate the spectrum of love and there are all kinds of things in love and until we really go into those, I don’t think we can truly discriminate what is love and what is not love. But I think of love as the force of creation, the force of creativity. Every act of creation is an act of love. And in my present understanding, I certainly accept the fact that it is very difficult to deal with all of it in a logical way. It may be that there are aspects of it that we’re just not conscious enough to perceive. That’s the issue.


MB:         Right.


WT:         And so, because we have, many people have a very idealized view of love and they see love as the romantic love, and so, when you start talking about the destructive force aspect of love, often, it’s just like if you were to build something brand new in a space, you first have to tear down the building in that space.


MB:         Yes.


WT:         And so the destructive force that you can see operating there is a necessary part of creating this new thing, and if you look at wars, for example—there are two issues. I’ll come to the negative side of war in a minute. But the positive side of war is that individuals become disciplined and individuals begin to think more intensely and focus more intensely. And so they create huge amounts of new knowledge and new technologies. And after the war, those individuals, because they have exhibited leadership and courage and they’ve been tested, they go on to build industries which nourish people and societies. So the whole process moves forward and we tend to think it could have happened without intervening wars, but I’m not sure that that is correct.

Now we come to the part that we don’t like about wars which also is a learning process in this whole picture. If I’m correct, that we are all spirits having a physical experience as we ride the river of life together, we’re in a ten-dimensional simulator. It is a huge teaching machine and we are learning in this teaching machine just as if you were sitting in front of a computer, but you’re so attached to it that you can’t distinguish it as a teaching machine. And the constructs that are created with that teaching machine look like bodies and look like all these other things and when they get blown up and are horribly mangled and all sorts of things, it looks like people die. But in fact, if I’m correct, then we are learning through this process but we’re indestructible to that process. That is, we will destroy the biobodysuits which is sort of like the destruction of a car we drive, but we still exist. We are still consciousness, we have gained from the experience.

So, when we talk about some of these concepts, that are far beyond where we are in consciousness on average, we don’t fully understand it. We have to grow in consciousness enough to begin to perceive the scope of the things we’re talking about and we have to take into account new considerations like our true indestructibility at the deeper levels of Self.


MB:         It’s a delicate edge, what you’re talking about. I understand what you’re saying but—


WT:         A very delicate edge.


MB:         It’s a view that has to be held with a great deal of integrity because it could so easily be distorted a fraction in one direction or another.


WT:         And compassion.


MB:         Yes.


WT:         I mean, all of these things, they have to be handled and held very, very delicately. It is an issue that we have to hold it as a provisional possibility until we’re more conscious and can prove details of these things. And we’re a long way from that.


MB:         Right. As you were talking about bodies, people dying and bodies being destroyed, the image that came into my mind was, for example, of Vietnam Veterans who are still alive, but how many of them are living such difficult, unhappy, distorted lives because of what happened to them there.


WT:         Indeed, and part of it is that they don’t understand and they think that they are that body, that personality self. And they’re basically not. The thing that’s evolving is the Soul Self which is not of physical material.


MB:         That would be a difficult thing to say to them.


WT:         Of course it would. But they have to come to it. They have to come to see it first as a possibility but in the experience, they’re all teaching experiences. They’re all learning experiences. I think it’s how the soul grows. It is how we develop the fine edge to be a truly meaningful co-creator and create the right things, not the wrong things and create things that have freedom of choice, etc., and freedom to understand. But we’re still children as far as the big picture is concerned.


MB:         It reminds me of the conversation you and I had a few weeks ago. I was talking about Richard Feynman, and what he wrote about his recognition of what he had done after the atomic bomb went off and you mentioned Oppenheimer as well.


WT:         Right, right. Exactly. Those become tremendous teaching experiences for those souls. I mean, all of it is. If I am close to being correct, that we are in fact living in a simulator and it is our personality self body, the biobodysuits that are interfacing with this creation, this simulator, then it’s all part of learning.


MB:         So, one of the interesting things that’s striking me about this is that wherever we are at, in terms of understanding, we’re still faced with questions of how to behave and how to live and how to act. I remember there was something you said when we talked about Oppenheimer and Feynman about people getting caught up in success and intellectual delight and the importance of having the proper ends and the proper means.


WT:         Yes, very much so. And not to be too attached.


MB:         Not to be too attached to what?


WT:         To the experience.


MB:         Oh, right.


WT:         To the world - be in the world but not of it. I mean, in essence, you see, we go back to the Vietnam experiences, part of it is that they’ve attached so strongly to that personality self biobodysuit, and the experiences, that they cannot separate consciousness from it. They cannot see themselves as something quite different. These are all things that ultimately we must learn as we evolve.


MB:         Can I come back to the question about creativity and love?


WT:         Sure.


MB:         Because I think you wrote in your book, Science and Human Transformation, something about human intention being the act of creation which is in the band of love that begets consciousness and this converts into energies which convert into mass.


WT:         Yes. I’m saying that the equation that conventional science looks at is that mass is interacting back and forth with energy and Einstein is recognized as having codified that connection. E = mc2. And now I’m saying the next piece of the equation is that energy interacts with consciousness and back and forth. And so they’re intraconvertable, one to the other ultimately. And then I’m saying further from this discussion that the next term in the equation is love. And it creates consciousness, etc. So, at least that’s my working hypothesis.


MB:         Brian Swimme who’s a Cosmologist—I don’t know if you know his work—


WT:         I know Brian.


MB:         He speaks about a connection between love and the force of gravitation.


WT:         That, you see, would be an interaction that would be between, in that equation, it would be love, to consciousness, to energy, to mass. And mass is where we presently think gravitation comes from, the interaction with mass. Curvature of space-time. And energies affecting that curvature, energy densities affecting that curvature, therefore affecting phenomena. So, the point is, they’re all connected, I think, with different fields, different things that we don’t understand yet.


MB:         And there was one other thing about the question of love. Because you also made a comment one time about passion being very important for imprinting intention.


WT:         Yes. The emotion—since the deltrons are of the emotion domain, the passion in the intent, that passion is important to activate the deltrons in my modeling. So it’s like a toner in a Xerox machine. If you don’t have enough toner, then you can’t make an imprint with the Xerox machine. So in essence, the deltron activation, the degree of deltron activation is important. This is what great musicians, I think, do, is that they pour their intent and the passion is to do that, to express that, and that, in my modeling, creates lots of deltrons which go out and they lift the symmetry state of the space that people are in and the people hear and experience things as if they’re in a sacred space.


MB:         That’s a stunning way of describing it. And also, it makes very clear on a human level, in terms of living creatively or creative acts, that the presence of passion, is very significant for that.


WT:         And part of it is again, the love comes into it because you care. You really care about others as part of your family, your work, and it’s also an act of devotion to the divine, however you see that. You’re being a true participant in the process.


MB:         That’s such a beautiful way of describing it, because I often talk with people when I’m working with them, about where their attention is, whether their attention is on themselves as creating something, or whether their attention is on the nature of what they’re creating and the people who are going to receive it, and how when you receive a piece of music or a painting or a piece of writing, you can actually tell. You can actually experience whether it was basically egoic or serving the person that created it, or whether it was essentially created to give to life.


WT:         Yes, exactly. And I think this goes back, to what we talked about some time ago, that the growth of consciousness has these three branches - the ascending branch, the surrender branch, and the descending branch.


MB:         Yes.


WT:         The ascending branch is where most people are these days, they’re learning this in schools, they’re learning it at work, and they’re learning it in social interactions. They are doing these things and ultimately, they’re becoming good at it and they feel good about themselves. And if they’re fortunate, then the second branch starts to grow in parallel, and that’s the surrender branch, and that’s really a difficult one to do in this world. And that is to re-direct their personal ego to the larger Self and begin to see all things around them and all people around them, all living things as part of them. They’re part of a system. And then if you really are working that well, the third branch often starts. And the third branch, being the descending branch, really means that the universe is working through you into the world. You’re being a channel for a deeper level of the universe to express through you into the environment where you are, to transform it.


MB:         That’s interesting. Because that also comes into the next two questions I wanted to discuss with you. One about creativity and collaboration, and the other about evolution, creativity and evolution. There’s a piece in your book where you talk about the increased coherence associated with our next level of being.


WT:         Being coherent is a very important part of this process.


MB:         In your book you say, “if we visualize the surface of the globe, we see separated batches of light forming, and expanding from a number of isolated locations. Each time these batches of higher consciousness overlap each other until the entire surface of the earth glows with this radiance.” That seems connected with what you were just talking about.


WT:         Yes, absolutely. Absolutely.


MB:         So just to backtrack a little bit, before getting to that—you describe in your book a band broadening effect when you were working as a technical consultant for a U.S. company. You were working with a scientist in an area that you weren’t an expert in, and you found that, I think you described it as listening very carefully and being with him…


WT:         Emotionally trying to nurture him. Just radiating to him.


MB:         And then there was this huge revelation.


WT:         There was, in fact, like a consciousness joining and so, the bandwidth of the individual and my bandwidth seemed to combine and because it really combined, there weren’t two separate things. They were one thing and with this larger bandwidth, you can express so much more and information just seemed to pour in and give resolution to the problem we were discussing.


MB:         This sounds rather like when you have a very good group of musicians playing jazz and improvising together. It sounds like the same process.


WT:         When they really get in the zone. Yes, they function like a flock of  birds in essence. They are really connected so that the movement of one immediately transfers through all the others and they turn and wheel and dive and do all these sorts of things as a group.


MB:         That’s so stunning.


WT:         Yes, it is stunning.


MB:         Another group, a group of people working together that you describe in your book where you talk about the ability that a group of people who are attuned with each other have to neutralize poison. It’s right at the end of the book.


WT:         I think that’s right. And this, of course, is how groups in the past, I think, have created sacred spaces. Again, it’s a group intent and because they really synchronize with each other, they become more coherent. Now what happens is that their amplitudes add and the intensity which is the square of the amplitude is now the square of the sum rather than the sum of the squares. I mean, numerically, it makes a huge difference.


MB:         I was just getting that.


WT:         Because you know, suddenly I flashed on this business of why would God want one more soul to be in real intimate communion with God? What is the benefit? And then I said, well, okay, suppose God is a million coherent souls and I am one. So in terms of amplitudes and let’s suppose I become coherent and it adds. What is the difference? And if you take the square of the sum. That is, you have a million squared, which was God before my entrance, plus one, which is me, plus the cross-product which is two million. So you see the cross-product becomes really significant when the numbers become large.


MB:         That’s so thrilling. Even as you’re describing that, I’m just having a physical sense of the tremendous aliveness of what that is that you’re talking about.


WT:         Yeah. This is, when you start looking at some of these numbers, you start looking at the energies that are latent in the physical vacuum, then you begin to see this is how you can truly create universes out of yourself.


MB:         Yes. So I have a couple of other things that fit into this. One is, I’m just thinking about businesses because I’ve done quite a lot of work in businesses and organizations, trying to help them develop a creative culture, a creative work environment. And it’s very difficult.


WT:         It is difficult because the issue is, as the number of individuals, n, becomes large, it is very difficult for the individuals to stay clear. But if they have practices and if they truly have passed the surrender stage—


MB:         Which not many people have.


WT:         Not many people have. Not many people have.


MB:         One of the things I’ve seen that really gets in the way is the people at the top not being fully ready to change and there being a lack of context.


WT:         Absolutely.


MB:         Which is really what you’re talking about.


WT:         Right. Right. The point is, this is the difficult issue for a team, for example, whether it’s a basketball team or a football team or a business. We’re now back to the business of what we were talking about, group coherence. And the difficulty to maintain group coherence as the numbers grow.


MB:         That’s interesting.


WT:         It’s very interesting.


MB:         I had a client a few years ago who headed up the team at Apple that developed  Quick Time VR and his description of what happened in that team was, that this coherence happened. And they had such a remarkable experience. They finished way before the deadline that they were expected to, and he described to me when they rolled out their finished product, many of the people who had done it together were in tears. And these were people who wouldn’t normally respond that way. And it was because of the level of intimacy and coherence that had arisen unexpectedly and almost incidentally between them  - that had been quite a few years before we started working together - and he’d been looking ever since for a work situation where he could live constantly in that way of working with people. And so he wanted me to help him find a situation like that.


WT:         This issue probably goes on in your group there with Andrew Cohen, to a good degree, and it goes on, to a good degree, with the Institute of Heart Math out in California. And one of the practices that helps this is that people get together every day at a certain time, especially in the morning and they meditate together and they really do a heart walk together before they then disburse to do their day. But the heart walk together keeps them connected. Now, that process can be enhanced with the kind of devices like the one we sent to you, relative to your Parkinson’s. But another device could be in such a room or in all rooms which are information entangled. If you lift them to the higher symmetry state, then basically, you can begin to see ways in which individuals working in various different parts of the building, once they start to make that connection with each other in the morning each day, then can persist throughout the day because the device- conditioned space pumps the intention. So the possibilities are there to be able to do this much, much better in the future than we have in the past.


MB:         That’s remarkable. Because you’re adding, in the sense of the device, you’re adding a piece.


WT:         Right. And at this point, it would be in the early days, I would call them training wheels to help people get into this state and maintain that state and create collectively. So that would be a pathway towards making a more coherent world.


MB:         One other thing, when people are really attempting to evolve or interested in change and interested in really evolving their consciousness, there’s a section in your book about dealing with the increased energy flow. “The increased coherence associated with our next level of being brings on line huge increases in radiant flux through our multiple bodies”. And the question is how can these bodies handle the flow without burnout, I’m interested in your comments on that, because this constant fluctuation for human beings at the moment is so intensely challenging since almost everybody, unless they’re very evolved beings already, is subject to that fluctuation. So in relation to this, you talk about the need for the Chakras to be aligned.


WT:         The Chakras, need to be aligned for individuals. Then comes in the group alignment with tuning to one another. You have to experience and practice and sort of build the inner muscles, which is like building a little thin fiber of a conductor into a thicker and thicker fiber, still with the high conductivity into a kind of bus bar which can handle huge power densities. That’s the issue of what we have to do. We have to build those internal infrastructures to have that character. The analogue is very similar to working out in a gym and building muscles in the gym. So these are bigger structures because they need to handle bigger loads. So it’s the same sort of thing except now, these infrastructures inside are in a frequency domain and we don’t know enough about that but the principle is the same, that in order to handle bigger power densities and broader bandwidths of frequencies, that’s the pathway. Keeping the fibers of the same thickness but increasing its conductivity, via intention, by factors of thousands leads to huge power density flows through the human.


MB:         So how can human beings prepare themselves so that there’s stability, in terms of handling these evolutionary increases in energy?


WT:         It’s mostly practice. Caring about it.


MB:         Caring about it?


WT:         Disciplined application. And keeping on keeping on. I mean, that’s really what it takes. The same, again, the example is an outer-world body builder. You know, you’ve got to work out regularly—you’ve got to discipline. You’ve got to be careful. You’ve got to build the load steadily, slowly. Let your body build in structures needed to handle the load. You have to be in touch with your body. You have to be in tune. You have to be accepting. You have to be careful not to overload yourself. You have to be patient. You have to accept the possibility, the belief that it’s there, and work at it. And the point is, what is being, what is growing here is the Soul Self. The Personality Self is one of the vehicles for doing that. But, for maybe many lifetimes.


MB:         Andrew Cohen gave a talk in New York and also in Boston recently about the development of consciousness or the development of the soul. And it was very interesting because he was pointing to the way that we have clarity about developing our bodies and our muscles and developing our emotional strength, and so on, but human beings don’t really have much sense of the fact that it’s possible to develop consciousness.


WT:         No, because they haven’t really started to think about it or work on it and articulate it and discriminate it, all of those things that are necessary for it to truly become a part of the day to day consciousness of people. It’s not something that can be put on like a garment. It is an internal transformation of awareness. And that takes time and practice.


MB:         And it’s through that internal transformation of awareness that this entire surface of the earth and globe - there’s a connection, isn’t there?


WT:         Yes. Exactly. And then when we get to that stage, I think we’ll really begin to see the interaction between ourselves and the planet and the planet and us.


MB:         How far do you think that has gone so far?


WT:         You know, it’s really hard to say. I think there are more and more people being aware and more and more people using their intention or trying to use their intention with respect to the planet, and other parts of ourselves in the human domain or biological domain. So in terms of what it’s really going to take, one is not able to evaluate that at this stage. I mean, ultimately, you see, one has to have a mathematics of that kind of phenomenon and then one can model what are the interactive consequences of this human mold on the surface of the earth, producing meaningful change in the inner structure of the earth and the various levels of that structure. And we’re not there yet. I mean, probably our work is as far advanced as anywhere else on the earth in the intellectual description of these kinds of things, although there certainly are various Tibetan Buddhists and others who are very advanced in their development and ability to do, even though they don’t intellectually comprehend probably the mathematical evolvement of these sorts of things.

Certainly in a partial answer to your question, the Maharishi has told their group that 1% can make a really significant change in a town and there, John Hagelin, and the people there at the Maharishi University are doing various kinds of experiments in various cities and towns around the world with thousands of meditators, and are producing real changes apparently in the lawfulness versus lack thereof. So we have entered a phase where some of these experiments are being initiated. And that’s a good sign and it is that kind of thing that will fine-tune these numbers. So the working hypothesis, if we want to have one right now, would be 1% are needed.


MB:         I know Suzanne Mendelssohn talks about the absolute crucial importance of obedience in this whole process.


WT:         Well, in her case, you see, what she is using is the word obedience as the bond that maintains coherence, and we’ve talked about how difficult it is in a company to maintain the coherence and then continue to do these great things as the company gets bigger and bigger. Well, certainly if everyone took the discipline of absolute obedience, or absolute attunement to some resonant note in the group, then it would maintain the coherence longer. So in terms of what her meaning of the term obedience, absolute obedience is, versus someone else’s term, there could be a lot of discussion about those sorts of things. But the intent is certainly there, so if you think of it as a kind of field, and I do say in the book Science and Human Transformation, that you want to change your mode of loving expression, then I did describe this aspect of continuously, day after day, applying a mental field of your best image of that quality. Just keep sustaining it as much as you can, day by day, day by day, day by day, day by day. Well, Suzanne’s statement of complete obedience is another example of a molding field and there probably could be other examples.


MB:         Well, this has been a stunning conversation! In terms of creativity is there anything you think we haven’t covered?


WT:         Nothing jumps out at me and I’ve just sort of sat here and responded to you. So I’ve just let it flow through in a kind of a channel procedure and not being too attached to the considerations. This is just a first phase of things and now you have to patch it together into the image that you want.


MB:         Yes, it’s been an absolutely remarkable conversation and I really appreciate your readiness to do it. I think this interview is going to be incredibly powerful for many people.


WT:         Yes, I think so too. It has that potential. I quite agree. I have found it to be very useful and it certainly seems, I suspect, that the unseen is very happy with the words between us.


MB:         That’s good. I’m very glad you’ve found it useful too, because I was really hoping that it would be a two-way process.


WT:         Well, it’s been an act of creation. Yes, and that’s always nice.


MB:         Thank you so much.