Did anyone test the objectivity of their OBEs ?

[Nemo]

quote:Originally posted by astralspinner



It has, in fact, been demonstrated scientifically that the part of the brain that allows us to read doesn't function when we're asleep, dreaming, or in a trance. That's why it's so difficult to read numbers & words when OOB - instead of our brain doing it all for us, we have to try and do it all by ourselves.

I heard that theory, but it doesn't seem to work for me because in my dreams I read on a regular basis, and big chunks of text, not just short sentences.

I would point out that Astral projections are not supposed to be dreams if they are objective (ie. not just dreams)

But you are right, objectivity tests don't have to involve texts. It can be cards (and the subject doesn't have to know that it will be a card), symbols, unknown objects, whatever, more unknown in advance the better.

I would just like to answer to the poster who used the irrelevant argument that it's all subjective because of scientific theories suggesting that consciousness is a reflux of memories or something.
Fine, but that applies also to the awaken walking state, and in the walking state you can do an objectivity test, you just walk to the piece of paper and read it. By "miracle" it is the same text written by the guy who wrote it!

[michael]

When I first started projecting I suggested to the Institute ofpsychophysical research in oxford that they set up a 5 digit number for me to attempt to get via an OBE (This was in 1967).
They agreed to do this.
Over the next few years NOTHING.
I never managed despite trying.
OBE's only happned in the vicinity of my bedroom.
Uncontrolled.
I do not know why.
But I KNOW I was out of the body every time I managed the dozens of times I did.
BUT I could never provide "objective" proof.
The onus is on me to explain that or get advice etc from others as to why.
We cannot duck out of providing "objective" proof though or at least explain in a valid way why it has not been provided yet.

[upstream]

Nemo wrote:

quote:

quote:quote:
Originally posted by upstream:
There is no distinct difference. In fact, even at now "we are in our heads" and "out of our body" meaning that we don't perceive the objective reality as it is. According to Rudolfo Llinas (...) of that could separate shared dreamings from real astral projections.

So I take it that you never tested the objective reality of your projections then?
Now let's hear from people with a modicum of common sense?

Captain, you have quoted me in a way even I can't understand my point. As far as I know Llinas is not involved in the astral business, he is a biophysics. I've just referred one of his statements he made on wakefulness. According to him "wakefulness is nothing other than a dream-like state modulated by the constraints of sensory inputs."

I said "we are in our heads" because our percepts are experienced through the works of our brain. At the same time, "we are out of or bodies" because even works and position of our brain (as part of our "phyisical body") is perceived by the brain, leading to the consclusion that we haven't have a "physical body" at all. What we call physical body is a mental representaion of something made by something else.

I think human existence is manifestation of our true self which is able to express only one part of itself through human consciousness that we could partly observe as the brain. It has been proven that work of our brain is highly correlate to specific states of consciousness. Of course, this fact doesn't mean that consciousness is by-product of the brain, however, since their changes are coinciding with each other some connection have to be exist.

Consciousnesses we having in lucid dreams (and very likely in shared dreams too) are coinciding with (phasic) REM. In theory, it is possible to decode signals from the visual cortex and see dreams projected onto a monitor ony fly (and being bonking rich by recording and selling them). On the opposite, astral projectiors cannot be tracked by monitoring eye movements or brain states because astral states seem to coincide with deep sleep states where brain would serve as a very hostile place for cognition.

Of course, in a given extent brain states are remain in correspondance but in a loosened manner (see the extremly similar wave patterns of F23-27) This suggests that cognition would be placed outside of the brain into more "subtle" systems of conssciousness. So, when I said that REM "is the only condition I'm currently aware of that could separate shared dreamings from real astral projections," I meant that cognitive activity in "real astral projections" couldn't be derived (only) from the brain.

I call an experience "real" RTZ-OBEs in which a second physical presence that capable of perceiving at least "holos" of the  physical word is established outside of the phyisical body's boundaries. I think this presence should be an energy field that dense enough to interact with other fields of physical objects. However, this field seems to not being dense enough to absorb thus perceive light.

From this reason, random numbers projected on a monitor or printed out on a paper cannot be "seen" in RTZ-OBEs. But this doesn't mean that it couldn't be perceived. The number remain unreadable only as long as haven't been recognized by some consciousness we have in contact with at least at an unconscious level. Preferably, the observer consciousness belong to an incarnated human being that still part of the shared dream we call waking life, however it could be the projector's moring self as well. Thus perception of the number is really result of "telepathy" and "precognition." If perception of the number never happen it wouldn't get more existence than a probability we could calculate.

Without the unconscious matching mechanisms that responsible for holding together the shared dreams of our waking society we would live somewhere between Focus levels #23-26. So, for me, there is no such thing that objetive reality - I live inside my mind because I'm dead already. The RTZ-body, the space it seems to occupy and the physical instruments we use to measure it are products of something that is nor inside nor outside of our non-existent "physical body" yet being connected at levels "below" our waking consciousness.

quote:So I take it that you never tested the objective reality of your projections then?

I never said that.

[Nemo]

quote:Originally posted by michael

When I first started projecting I suggested to the Institute ofpsychophysical research in oxford that they set up a 5 digit number for me to attempt to get via an OBE (This was in 1967).
They agreed to do this.
Over the next few years NOTHING.
I never managed despite trying.
OBE's only happned in the vicinity of my bedroom.
Uncontrolled.
I do not know why.
But I KNOW I was out of the body every time I managed the dozens of times I did.
BUT I could never provide "objective" proof.
The onus is on me to explain that or get advice etc from others as to why.
We cannot duck out of providing "objective" proof though or at least explain in a valid way why it has not been provided yet.

Ah, at last a concrete answer and not a flood of questionable personal beliefs.
Could I ask you to clarify certain details.

- You say that the Institute of psychophysical research did set up a 5 digits number. You also said that astral projection happened only in the vicinity of your bed.
Do you mean that the number was set up far away from your room and you could not project to that place but could stay only in your room?

Do you think that you could read a number that would be placed in your room but that you couldn't see from your bed, on the top of some surface above you?

Of course, that wouldn't be a proof to others, unless they observe you all the time when you make the attempt, but that would be a proof for yourself.

But I would be interested to hear from people who can do RT projection as a matter of routine. Are there such people here?

[michael]

Ah, at last a concrete answer and not a flood of questionable personal beliefs.
Could I ask you to clarify certain details.

sure..........................

- You say that the Institute of psychophysical research did set up a 5 digits number. You also said that astral projection happened only in the vicinity of your bed.
Do you mean that the number was set up far away from your room and you could not project to that place but could stay only in your room?


yes..set up hundreds of miles away in oxford...

Do you think that you could read a number that would be placed in your room but that you couldn't see from your bed, on the top of some surface above you?

yes I could...if i had a "classsical" obe and could control it and there was not too much distortions in perceiving with "astral" eyes etc..

Of course, that wouldn't be a proof to others, unless they observe you all the time when you make the attempt, but that would be a proof for yourself.

But I would be interested to hear from people who can do RT projection as a matter of routine. Are there such people here?

we haveI agree to explain why NO-ONE and I mean no-one has ever successfully done an OBE and achieved a target under laboratory conditions..I know all about Charles tarts' one in 1967 with a subject but it is not entirely scientifcally viable.i KNOW that I amd thousands other really do get OBE but we are owe a legitiamte explanation as to why we have not proven it objectively...

[Nemo]

quote:Originally posted by michael

we haveI agree to explain why NO-ONE and I mean no-one has ever successfully done an OBE and achieved a target under laboratory conditions..I know all about Charles tarts' one in 1967 with a subject but it is not entirely scientifcally viable.i KNOW that I amd thousands other really do get OBE but we are owe a legitiamte explanation as to why we have not proven it objectively...

Well, the first question is WHO was tested, are they people who "routinely perform RT projections" and to whom a RT projection would be as simple as walking out the room, or were they occasional projectors with limited control.

I must say on the other hand that if I was such expert RT projector who has proven to HIMSELF the objectivity of RT projections by an OBJECTIVITY test such as reading, I would personally think twice about submitting myself to tests and proving the "paranormal" to the world.
On the other hand, there are people who actively write books that promote astral projection in which they describe themselves as experts.
So if they already try to convince people that projection is real, they would probably not feel discomfort at the thought of actually proving such a thing.

[Nemo]

I am new to this, I had quite a few spontaneous projection experiences, but what I'm wondering is if those who can project more or less at will, have tested the objectivity of their experiences?

The simplest test would be to ask someone to write something unknown to the projector on a piece of paper and to put it on some place known by the projector (next room) and to test if you can read what is actually written when you project.
Such test would be the absolute test of reality of OBE experiences (ie. not imagination/controled hallucination).

Did anyone actually do that, or some similar objectivity test?