The Basement: Eric Wargo | Time Travel Physics, Precognitive Dreams, and Quantum Biology

Today, I'm sitting down with Eric Wargo. He's an anthropologist and science. writer, but that's not why he's here. Eric has spent the last decade. researching one of the most taboo ideas. in science, the possibility that the. future can influence the present. Taboo. I've been saying this for years. Every. time I get married, I get the feeling. it's a bad idea. Then boom. This isn't. time travel in the sci-fi sense, something more profound. He calls it. precognition and he argues it's grounded. in Einstein's block universe. Black.

universe sounds like when the lizard. people keep the good timeline locked up. The evidence comes from quantum physics. experiments, lab studies that seem to. prove retrocausation, dreams that come. true years later, artists who paint. disasters before they happen. Well, every year I dream I'm going to get. audited by the IRS. Then boom. Eric has. five books on the subject. His work. bridges hard science and consciousness. research, and this conversation gets out. there. We talk about time loops, precognitive dreams, the science of. synchronicity, and how the future might.

be pulling us towards specific outcomes. I think you're going to like this one. Let's go down to the basement. Dr. Wargo, welcome to the basement. I'm. excited. I'm excited for this. I'm. excited, too. Before we get started, um tell me why on. God's green and glorious Earth would. anyone own a monitor lizard? >> [laughter]. >> Why? Yeah, [clears throat] well, my Okay, so. uh my.

oldest daughter, Emily, uh is really into reptiles and lizards. and she has been wanting, you know, she. watched all the reptile influencer. videos on on YouTube and just really. wanted uh the certain kind of monitor. lizard and. uh initially it was like, "Yeah, yeah, we'll get you one when you're 13. You. know, we'll get you one when you're 13.". And then. but it never, you know, it never went. away. And then you know what? I kind of. started wanting one, too. What? Really?

Yeah, I've all monitor lizards are the. coolest. I've I when I was a kid, I was. monitor lizards were just the coolest. animals on Earth. You know, Komodo. dragons are the monitor lizards, you. know. And uh. so. uh you know, my father-in-law. said he'd help out, you know, [laughter]. financing financing the vivarium. uh and uh yeah, so last April we got a. baby uh spiny-tailed monitor lizard and.

he's grown into a lovely, you know, 2-ft. long. um. little creature that we love dearly. Uh. it's been a wild, very interesting. experience. learning about, you know, reptile. husbandry. >> [laughter]. >> and uh. and having a a pet in my life uh yeah, in our lives that is not a typical pet, you know? I mean, we have cats and of. course I love my cats, but.

uh. and I grew up with dogs, but you know, reptiles are very different. What's his. name? His name is Sunflower. Okay. She. She named him. Are you Are you feeding like live mice. or Live insects. Live insects? >> Yeah. Okay. >> Yeah. Uh. but he's he is delightful. He's. delightful. They're very, you know, they're very intelligent in their own. way. They're not, you know, it's not the. same as like a mammal, but uh they, you. know, he's he's very chill, you know, we. handle him and pet him and and Does he.

walk around the house? No, he needs. Unfortunately, the the difficulty with. lizards and especially monitor lizards. is they require very high temperatures. So, he has. uh. you know, he has like a basking rock. that's like 110° and and, you know, bright bright lights in his enclosure. Um but no, he's awesome and I, you know, and they're they're fascinating. It's. just fascinating to to. to bond with another kind of animal, you.

know? It's like it's fascinating enough. to bond with a cat or or any other kind. of mammal, but to. develop a bond with a reptile is really. it's a it's another level if you're a if. you're an animal person, which everyone. in my family, we're all animal people. Same. So, it it recognizes Oh, it's. Okay. >> Oh, sure. Sure. Yeah, he No, he totally. trusts It takes a lot longer to develop. that bond. It It took a few months, you. know, to get him comfortable with with.

us and comfortable with us being around. him first of all and then eventually. handling him and so on. It's not like a. kitten or something like that. But no, he's he's he's great and he, you know, looks forward to seeing me every morning. when He's saying he's greeting you at. the door. >> [clears throat and laughter]. >> Yeah, no, he he's he's really cool. Yeah, so I'm glad you asked about that. Yeah, so How long does How long does. Sunflower live? He's going. well, knock on wood, he is he is. uh he could live as long as 20 years. Wow.

>> Yeah. Okay. Yeah. So, and we're hoping that. he will cuz he's uh he's awesome. I've. had birds, so I guess it's kind of the. same thing. Yeah. >> Cuz uh you wouldn't expect them to. recognize you, but my little Maxi, he. definitely he definitely did. Well, birds are incredibly intelligent. I. mean, they're they're mammal-level. intelligence and uh yeah, that doesn't. surprise me. What kind of bird is it? He. was a cockatiel. It's a while ago cuz I. have cats now and I don't they wouldn't. do well with a cockatiel. >> Right. Right. I've thought about um like.

an African gray, but they live so long. that it would outlive me. >> Right. So, I don't you know, you have to. will your pet to somebody. You don't. want to be on the receiving end of that. >> Right. Right. Totally. No, well, I. highly recommend monitor lizards. They're very, very, very, very cool. Uh. you know, I feel bad for her roommate in. college wherever she goes. [laughter]. Well, I kind of suspect. Yeah, that that'll that'll. >> be, you know, but that's, you know, we'll cross that.

bridge when we come to it. That's We. still got 8 years or so till that. happens. Right. Uh speaking of college, so you your. PhD's in in cultural anthropology. >> Yes. And then you moved into. more psychology. So, can you tell us. about your background, your parents? Yeah. Okay, well, so I grew up My. parents were psychologists uh growing. up. And then when I studied. anthropology, I really sort of studied. psychological anthropology, so I got a. like a real real basis in. in uh psychological theory and. psychoanalysis and so on. And uh and I.

after I got my degree finally after a. long time that I don't even want to talk. about or remember, um. I. you know, I was not suited to academia, so I. did what everyone who has a degree and. can't be an academic does, which is. become a editor and writer. And. Washington, D.C. is where those people. congregate because it's full of. nonprofits and scientific organizations.

and the government and people who are. hiring editors and writers who are smart. and have, you know, a lot of educated. too much education and no real-world. experience and so. >> [laughter]. >> so they work directly or indirectly for. the government or for for the nonprofit. world. What is it like to grow up with. two psychologists as parents? That. sounds difficult. Yeah, it's I don't. recommend it. Okay. >> [laughter]. >> I mean, there's got to be advantages. like.

you've got a problem, you can talk to. mom and dad and really get to the root. of it. Oh, no, I'm wrong. >> Or not. Yeah, no, my my my uh. well, my I should say my dad was a. psychologist. My mom had a master's in. psychology, but she didn't work in the. field. But my father was He was more of. a scientific. psychologist. Um he didn't he wasn't. seeing patients and stuff like that. Um. And then but then that sort of. was a natural basis for me to work for a.

psychology organization in Washington, D.C. So, for many years I was an editor. and then editorial director of of one of. the two big psychology. uh scientific societies uh in the United. States, both of which are based in. Washington, D.C. Um. yeah, and and indirectly that job is. part of actually my backstory that led. me to doing the work I do, even though. the work I do would be completely. rejected by by my former. >> [laughter]. >> Psychologists, they don't like this. >> They do not like this stuff. They are.

the most uh I mean, studies have even. been done on on sort of the degree of. hostility. towards parapsychology of different. academic fields and psychologists are. number one. They, you know, for them. anything smacking of ESP or or. uh parapsychology is, you know, they. have a chapter on pseudoscience at the. end of their psych 101 textbooks and. they'll put parapsychology in that. I.

remember it. I remember that from my own. studies. Yeah. >> Yeah. So, uh and it's real. I mean, that. we can talk about. this, but the the. extreme. prejudice. toward. parapsychology. uh. really came to disturb me. uh when I saw it firsthand. And this was. around the time that I was. um learning about, you know, I I grew up. with that kind of knee-jerk assumption.

that ESP is is. uh myth. But. uh after I had my UFO sighting, which we. can talk about, I I I. was reading, you know, Jacques Vallee. and he's he's talking about psychic. phenomena and like they're real. And. he's Here's a smart guy, you know, taking this subject seriously and I. felt, well, I need to do my due. diligence here and and read up on it. And that was that was the huge. paradigm shift for me. That was the huge.

ontological shock. You know, I didn't. have any problem with with UFOs, but I I. had a huge problem with the existence of. anything like ESP. But I realized. I you know, I was reading it was around. the time. around this time that. uh Daryl Bem's prominent research, we. can talk about that too, >> Sure. uh came out, his feeling the. future studies, which. uh. I was like, what? I don't know if I can. swear on your show.

>> Sure. Uh what the is going on here? >> We're going to say that a lot today, I. think. >> Okay, excellent. Um and uh and then I. realized, you know, I've had those. dreams. I've had precognitive dreams. You know, I'd had a dream about 9/11 on. the morning before 9/11. Well, they. >> and I and I had just swept it under the. rug. You know, that's what you do. When. you don't have a Yes. When you don't. have a a mental box. or cultural box to put an experience in, you just. it just it really just leaves your head.

You just like, well, there's no place. for this to live, this experience to. live and it just it just goes away. So. people, you know, often find that like, God, I've been having these experiences, but I just didn't even think about them. Um and that and that was true for me, too. I'd have been having precognitive. dreams and [snorts] I just because of my. beliefs. my belief system, you know, my unexamined belief system, I. just didn't let it trouble me, but you.

know, I I I found that I had to do that. But my colleagues, you know, when when. Daryl Bem's paper came out, which was in. 2011, my colleagues were they was they was. about to be published. an un a manuscript draft of it came. across my desk because it was about to. be published by our rival. psychological society. I won't use the. names of the societies, but. um. uh and my colleagues were considering. writing an angry letter.

to. >> journals? >> to the journals saying this this is. preposterous and should never be. published, you know, it makes the field. look bad, blah blah blah blah. And that like. that just seemed so unscientific to me. A it's a theme that comes up over and. over on this show when I speak to. scientists is scientific hostility from. the scientific community. Right. Right. Well, we'll get into the details. of Bem's work, which is amazing. Um. take us to the the UFO sighting and I.

you know, in full disclosure, I I asked. you a a few questions before we came in. here, what you'd be comfortable talking. about. I wasn't sure you'd be okay with. the UFO story. So I was excited that you. would be. cuz some people are embarrassed by it. Okay. >> Sure. Well, in my case it wasn't. anything up close and personal and it. wasn't a it wasn't a close encounter. I. mean, it was a it would be a close. encounter of the first kind, you know, it was a sighting of two orbs uh sort of. dancing with each other and moving. across the sky. This was in Philly Okay. >> on July 4th, 2009 and my then girlfriend.

uh and I were camped out there's a I. don't know if you know Philly at all, but there's a in front of the Art. Museum, my favorite art museum, there's. a long sort of green belt kind of area. and I was camped out with a bunch of you. know, there was just like lots of people. there gathering waiting for the. fireworks to start. Uh the fireworks. don't start in Philly until sort of. later in the evening, unlike a lot of. cities. Uh. so we were camped out there and there.

was a. Sheryl Crow was playing on the steps of. the of the Art Museum. We couldn't see. her, but you know, we could hear the. Sheryl Crow concert. Sheryl Crow who turned out turns out is. really into UFOs. I didn't even know. that at the time. >> see these or something? >> I have no idea. Cuz these were seen, yes? By others? >> They were seen by others, yeah, because. so anyway, I I see this thing, I you. know, my I show my girlfriend and I try. to I had one of those flip cams that. they were selling for a couple years. back around then and I I.

tried to film it. Uh nothing came out on the film, but it. was it was far away and the light was. bad. Anyway, you know, definitely wasn't. a firework, definitely wasn't Chinese. lanterns, it wasn't anything like that. I've like seen. tons of satellites in my life. I know. what satellites and everything else what. that stuff looks like. It was not. anything like that. But it was like, wow, that was weird. And then the next day I got on to MUFON, I guess. I guess it must have been MUFON. and found that there had been other. reports uh of the same thing. Were you a.

a UFO guy at that point or I wasn't. I. mean, I've always I've always sort of in. the back of my mind been interested in. the subject, but I never uh until then I. had no idea that there were serious. people actually studying it. scientifically and so on. I didn't know. who Jacques Vallée was and all that. But. anyway, when I saw that there had been. other reports of the same thing in. Eastern Pennsylvania uh on the same. night, I thought, okay, well, I'll make. my report to MUFON and so a MUFON guy. called me and you know, I made my. made my report. So that the the.

encounter itself was not. spectacular, but. it was. enough to get me to start reading. And so as one does, one reads you know, I was reading Richard Dolan's books and. uh Jacques Vallée's books. And you're. like, these guys are actually really. smart. >> These guys are actually really smart and. this is really compelling. And uh. and I had a you know, I had a blog at. that point that I you know, I was. writing about science fiction films and.

stuff like that, but I started writing, you know, writing blog posts and. uh you know, at the time I assumed it. was extraterrestrials and so I was, you. know, all all having fun with the. extraterrestrial hypothesis. Uh. but the the fact that this topic. dovetails with. parapsychology. in so so many ways and. the fact that you had really smart. people like Jacques Vallée. talking about psychic phenomena that.

occur often in conjunction with UFO. encounters, uh that part that was really that was. the. I I guess. when people use the word ontological. shock and it wasn't a all at once shock, but it was a kind of a gradual. paradigm shift for me to. first countenance the idea that well, maybe. psychic phenomena are real, maybe these. things really happen. And. uh and then, you know, gradually.

realizing, well, you know, I have these. experiences. I have precognitive. experiences and so on and. >> Did you run this by mom and dad? No. No. No. Okay. Ever? No. No, actually my my. father passed away that year. Actually, that was that's that's kind of an. interesting aspect of this experience. because this happened. um in July 2009, my father had cancer at. that point and he wound up he passed. away that September or October. Um and in fact, like a lot of life of. people's happened, my girlfriend broke.

up with me and that September, my father. passed [snorts] away. A lot of lot of. real heavy stuff. Um and to deal with. my father's passing, he had he had. gotten into oil painting. after he had retired. And he had all. these. oil paints and equipment, easels and. he's the kind of hobbyist who like buys. every possible piece of equipment for. their hobby. Uh and in most cases don't.

even wind up doing it, but he did. Yeah. >> [laughter]. >> You know that guy? I'm I'm kind of that. guy, too. Yeah. Um but anyway, so he had. all this. great oil painting stuff and I had never. been a painter, but I thought, well, you. know, I'm going to take all this stuff. back to Washington, D.C. and. uh so I wound up spending about 6 months. getting really into oil painting and. painting these gigantic paintings of. UFOs. Um. uh which are still now in my. house. Uh and so that was kind of my way of.

working through. a lot of issues was just like diving. into art. Um. uh but yeah, it was a very painful year. in a lot of ways. Uh but. >> That that that emotion probably makes. sense for your story, yes? >> It does make sense and and working. through it via art. is something, you know, it's something I. write about in in my book From Nowhere. that you know, there's the the the the. it's funny the way UFOs and paranormal. experiences.

uh it often inspires people to do art. Yes. >> And they work through it that way. It's. just like in Close Encounters, you know, he has a he has a UFO encounter and like. builds a sculpture in his living room. and you could, you know, uh Jacques. Vallée's one of the characters in that. movie. Yeah. Yeah. And you could remove. the UFOs from the story completely and. you could make it a story about a male. midlife crisis. Yeah, she did. A male. midlife crisis like suddenly like, you. know, ambivalent about his family and and and.

and needing to work through these. visions that are coming and create art. about it and. uh and bond with other people who are on. that same journey. Uh but yeah, and so it's yeah, it's. interesting that my UFO sighting was. directly over the Philly Art Museum, which. in fact, some of the important works of. art that I talk about in my. writing are in that museum. Uh. you know, it's my fa it's my favorite. art museum, bar none. Did you seek out.

other experiencers or mutual support or. anything like that? >> Not at that time, no. I mean, it wasn't. the kind of thing where I needed. support, you know, I I wasn't you know, again, it was not an up close and. personal kind of thing. I was not. abducted. I was not. uh. it was not an ontological shock for me. to see a UFO, you know, it was just. really cool. Yeah. Uh but but it got me to to do the. reading. But, uh, no. So, I didn't talk to other. experiencers at that point. Well, we. talked earlier about how history will.

probably be very kind to Jacques Vallee. is about his presence on this on the. subject. What was it about his. his writing that made you go, "Okay, this is something different." Well, he. is. a brilliant. thinker and a very nuanced subtle. thinker. His background is bananas with His. bananas with Yeah, but his the thing is. what's more interesting to me than even. his scientific background is his. interest in hermeticism and alchemy.

Mhm. Because that actually I had gotten. really interested in alchemy in the. 1990s. I lived for a couple years in. Prague in the middle of the 1990s. Uh, uh, it was there was a lot of American. expats living in Prague. And Prague was sort of the capital of. Renaissance alchemy. And they were. kind of in the city they were kind of. uh, there was a conference of alchemists. and uh, sort of an academic conference.

on alchemists and there was a big museum. exhibition of Rudolph the second who was. the. emperor who sort of supported he was the. patron of of alchemy and all that. So, this was sort of fermenting at the time. when I was living there and I. didn't know anything about alchemy. before I lived in Prague, but uh, that. experience living there and. uh, talking to some of the scholars who. came for that conference. uh, got me really turned on to alchemy. So, I for many years.

you know, around the end of the 90s and. beginning of the 2000s I was really. interested in. uh, Renaissance alchemy and hermetic. thought and. Jacques Vallee. is very much. grounded in that hermetic. philosophical tradition. And that's what. makes him so fascinating. I mean, he's. like on the one hand he's a scientist, but he's so much more than that. And I. think I have the emerald tablet by me. Do you? Yeah, there it is back there on. the wall. >> Oh, awesome.

Um, he. uh, the fact that he brought so many. multi-disciplinary. influences to his work. uh, was really appealing to me, you know, and not he wasn't just a smart guy. I. mean, he wasn't just a smart, you know, like Richard Dolan like fantastic. researcher, you know, just like this is. fantastic. He's an actual bonafide. historian doing doing real research.

But, Jacques Vallee was bringing all. these different influences to his. thinking and I just I really. >> a venture capitalist for 15 years. There's that, you know, like yeah. Um, so. just so many um, angles to his thinking and. and he became yeah, he I really. you know, I I just have a a shelf of all. of his all of his books, you know, and. and which I've read and reread. So, what. specific thoughts what specific ideas.

does Jacques have about connecting. psychic phenomena to UFOs that attracted. you? >> well, it's it wasn't you know, I don't. agree with everything Jacques Vallee. says. In fact, I've kind of come to sort. of disagree with a lot of his basic. ideas. Which doesn't matter, you know, I just I. just respect him as a as a thinker and. as someone who is thinking way outside. the box. Uh, so you know, the. first of all, just saying, "Look, extraterrestrial put that thought aside.

for a while. uh, and think about the other. dimensions of this phenomenon that don't. fit that box." I mean, that was very. important for me as like, "Oh, duh, yeah, this this doesn't seem like aliens. visiting us from outer space. This is. something. uh, this is something very different and. uh, his. you know, sh- showing that this the. phenomenon goes back to the dawn of. history. Um, uh, was very important. Uh, and you.

know, and his his attempts to think. about this in terms of human. consciousness and human society and. culture and the idea of of. uh, UFOs as a control system I think was. a very interesting, you know, my. favorite book. of Jacques's is uh, the invisible college. >> Mhm. Uh, I've got like a first edition that I. found Ooh. treasured. uh, That's right, you're a vinyl. collector, aren't you? I'm a vinyl and a. book collector. I I've I've got a very.

sizable library. Vinyl's too expensive, honestly. I I I I. that that was a few years and then I. thought, "Okay, I can't do this. anymore." But, uh, but books, you know, I I continue to. buy many many books. Um, I think I keep eBay in business. Same. Um, do you think we're seeing more. of the I mean, we see a lot of orbs. Are. we seeing more nowadays than we did like. cuz you see them showing up in. Renaissance paintings even before. Are we seeing more now or has it always. been? It's hard to tell what's an effect.

of the internet and what's an effect of, you know, the culture around UFOs that. sort of makes people notice them. I I I don't I don't have an answer to. that. I don't know. I I my sense is that. these orbs have been around from the. start. Um, you know, and you know, I I. you know, what are they? You know, I I. don't dis- I don't discount the. extraterrestrial hypothesis. I think. that that that honestly I assume that. the universe is teeming with. civilizations at.

many way way way more advanced than ours. who would naturally send out automated. probes and and uh, technology to monitor. everything going on in the universe. I. you know, I think we're living in a. surveillance universe. You know, I think. we are being surveyed and always have. been. There have been orbs floating. around our planet since before there. were humans probably. Um, uh, just keeping tabs on things and who. knows nudging things or whatever. Uh, so I'm my assumption you know, is.

that. there's that, but is that does that. account for. the whole of the UFO phenomenon? I I. tend to doubt that. It doesn't feel like it and something I. want to talk to you a little bit later. in the show is. for my brain it's easier for me to. reconcile. that this is more of a local phenomena. that crossing these vast distances I. just can't get my mind to wrap around. that these societies have have broken. the light speed barrier and they're. here. It's just it's easy for me to comprehend.

that this is a local phenomenon that. it's based on consciousness or it's. multi-dimensional or something like. that. Yeah. Yeah, and time travel that I'm I am fully on. board with Mike Masters thesis that that. time travel could be a part of it. Sure, so Mike Masters. anthropologist Anthropologist. >> are He says that that. yeah, he's he's looking at it. He's a. physical anthropologist and he's looking. at it more from the standpoint of. morphology of Grays.

that you know, for all kinds of reasons. they look like what we might evolve. into. Mhm. Um, I'm less persuaded by that argument. I. mean, he's he's of the school of thought. that you know, extraterrestrials are. going to look like everything. They're. not going to be humanoid. Um, I kind of. disagree with that. I think that that. convergent evolution is going to result. in humanoids everywhere. So, that's the. Copernican principle. That's interesting. that that that life no matter where it. evolves is going to take sort of the. same course. >> Same course, yeah. Not life, but.

civilization, you know, techno-. technology using. uh, cultural beings. uh, they're going to have taken a. certain path to get where they are and. that path is going to take them through. bipedalism. and having something like hands and a. head on the top of a a vertical body. I. think that's uh, my my money would be that that. uh, the universe will be full of. humanoids. Um, so that that part I don't.

necessarily agree with with Mike on, but. the reality. of time travel. the fact that it is technologically. going to be possible and if it's going. to be possible then it already exists. Right. Um, I think there are all kinds. of reasons that that hypothesis should. be front and center. Well, let me pick your anthropology. brain for a second cuz you just made me. think of something I hadn't considered. So, if humanoids are going to evolve. everywhere, does that mean primates.

would evolve everywhere? Something like that. Some proto-primate. that species, yeah. That's interesting. So, then you have to just keep going. back through evolution then. So, then. mammals or some type of mammal would. evolve everywhere. Or are we talking. I hate to even say the word reptilian, but a reptilian humanoid? You know, there's. the idea that had. mammals not taken over the earth after. the Chicxulub meteor. uh, that.

uh, reptiles would have potentially. evolved uh, uh, you know, a. an upright Sure. uh, humanoid like uh, intelligent It's one of my favorite. sci-fi tropes is the historian who. >> Of course. And there was a uh, I'm trying to think. if he was an anthropologist, Dougal. Dixon. uh, wrote some books in the in the 80s, you know, sort of. uh, projecting you know, what what would.

you know, what would these alternative. evolutionary. um, I'm going to have to write him down, Dixon. I think I I think I'm getting. that right as far as he but I know that. there's somewhere there's a like a. sculpture of a sort of a reptilian. humanoid um, uh, that's you know, sort of a. hypothetical, you know, reptile. uh and I smile too when I talk about it, but there's 10% of my audience that's. screaming at at us right now that the. reptilians as is totally real. It's. definitely real.

Yeah, I know. I'm I'm. I don't know what to make of that. I. don't know what to make of that. I mean, I know. I'm starting to take you know, I you. know, David Icke. you know, uh. >> Some interesting theories. Some. interesting theories and he's he's been. proven right. You're now seeing that oh. my god, he was right about a lot of. stuff. >> And. It's just the presentation that's. off-putting. It's the presentation and. then there's the reptilians ideas like. you know, I have trouble with that, but. what whatever. I'm at this point in my. life, I'm not.

I'm not rejecting anything. Uh you know, this is this is definitely. a time of ontological shock in a lot of. ways, you know, political ontological. shock and and. uh What do you read on the um on the. disclosure narrative? Is this something. is this a sci-op? Are we being prepared? I know we're speculating. I just kind of. want your thoughts. I I just I don't. know. I go you know, you could ask me. the same question every day and I'd tell. you something different because I I. flip-flop. I don't know. I mean, I think.

there's definitely sci-ops going on. I. mean, I don't think anyone would. disagree with that. A lot of this disinformation. I. I tend to agree that, you know, it seems. like. you know, there's there's obviously. there's there's obviously really a there. there. Um, but that it's being. obfuscated by, you know, interests in. the military-industrial complex who. don't want. don't want it disclosed for various. reasons and so they're running all these. in this interference. uh and then there's people who want who.

want it disclosed, but nobody. no very few people you maybe those 10. people that James Fox talks about know. know the full picture and everyone else. is there there they're playing on some. team, but they don't have the full full. story. >> [snorts]. >> So. it's just uh a very confusing it's just. a very confusing landscape. And in fact, it's that. that that kind of got me. off. of the UFO topic. I think in about, you. know, I I spent a couple years like really.

going down the UFO rabbit hole after my. sighting and then it's like oh my god, this field is just so full of. of. people who are too credulous or people. who are. you know, obviously covering things up. and people who are spreading. disinformation and so on. And that was. long before the the current wave since. 2017. So, I just sort of. put the UFO topic. aside and it's only in the last couple. years that I've sort of gotten back into. it, but I'm not you know, I can't keep I.

can no longer keep track of who all the. players are and. >> [laughter]. >> and who's who's trustworthy and who's. not and who's who's. got, you know, an agenda. It's it's uh. Well, I recently was attacked um by the. New York Times. This means I'm probably. over the target. for saying that the government our. government probably has anti-gravity, probably has some type of zero-point. energy, probably has or is at least. working on some type of time travel. technology. Um I know you're familiar.

with T. Townsend Brown's work. Um maybe. you're familiar with AC gravity Dr. Ning. Li's work in anti-gravity. Um. you tend to agree that there's. technology there? Yeah. Yeah. It's Jesse. Michel's stuff red-pilled me on that. I. mean, I I I that was another topic that. I had. I had sort of been. really skeptical about. uh. >> Which is good. That's good that that's. that's your reaction initially. Yeah, I. think it's important to have skepticism. toward all this, but uh. seeing the story of of Thomas Townsend.

Brown and. uh. I'm yeah, I'm I'm convinced that that's. what you're saying is probably probably. correct and that this is probably all. uh in the hands of defense contractors. who, you know, are not beholden to FOIA. requests and are not Hal Puthoff said. that recently in the in the documentary. that that's how they would hide these. >> Right. this technology. >> Exactly. Exactly. Now, it's all making a.

lot of sense. It's all making a lot of sense. why we don't know more than we do. Uh I. think I think that's been the. the big benefit of the of the whole. disclosure movement the last several. years is that I think we're all kind of. learning. we're learning a lot more about how the. government works and how the. military-industrial complex works and. how these secrets can be kept and how. people can be kept in the dark. How. everyone can be kept in the dark, you.

know, presidents. you know, let alone you or me. Sure, they're just temporary employees. >> temporary employees and. um. yeah, so I you know, when I got out of. the I I sort of. departed from the UFO topic in about. 2011 and I started reading about the. Cold War. because, you know, I I realized that the backstory here a. big part of the backstory is, you know, the CIA and the Cold War and the. military-industrial complex and defense. contracting and all that. So, I got you. know, I acquired a big library of, you.

know, books on on what now is called. deep politics, you know, and. I I I recommend that for anyone who. wants to. think about UFOs. You you you can not. think about this topic until you have. learned a bit about. how what. the United States did after World War. II. And and how our intelligence community. works and how the defense industry works.

and how defense contracting works and. uh and I think what we're seeing is that. that. those politics those deep politics are. really at play and. >> From Roswell to Stargate all the way. through. >> everything yeah. Well, I consider you a. thinker. So, let's let's just play for a. second. >> glad you do. Everybody does. There's not a lot of. you don't. you don't come under a lot of fire. from skeptics. Even people who are.

skeptical of your work, they say that. it's thoughtful. So, I I I think. I think you have a lot of respect from. the scientific community, you know? Do. you feel there's hostility? Uh I don't. think the scientific community the. scientific community is really aware of. me. Um I think if you're talking about. mainstream science, I think people who. are interested in in these topics are. often hostile to. mainstream science. uh and that's where I get the pushback.

is because people see me as a. materialist. Um And you don't consider yourself one. I consider myself sort of materialist, but I but I I want to see. the the answer is not to throw out. materialism or to pretend that. the last four centuries of science are. or that they you know, we've. been looking in the wrong direction, but. we do need science needs like like every. other human institution has a lot of. problems, a lot of biases. It's ripe for some major paradigm shifts.

and that's what I'm pointing that's what. I'm saying is what there needs to have. what needs to happen is a paradigm shift. uh within science and within. other fields as well, but I'm not you. know, I'm not someone who would say that. that that the last four centuries of. materialism has been has been a dead. end. I mean, people who say that. materialism is dead like really? I mean, I you know, how many medications are you. taking? I mean, how I you know, how you. know, you're you're how old and you're.

still alive? Guess guess guess. guess who you have to thank for. for that fact. So, um. Look, I hate big pharma too, but I'm. kind of glad they're there. Exactly. So, that could that takes me. back to to just uh. the thought experiment for second is. what would what is the world look like. if those technologies become public? What. I mean, we we can get we're in sci-fi. world now, but what does that look like? Yeah, that's.

if they became public all at once, I. could see where that would be a really. disruptive. thing. I can I can definitely see you. know, I wrote you know, becoming time. fearing sort of trying to take a kind of. techno-utopian. view of of these technologies you know, transforming our lives. The reality is. they're going to be secret. And. uh and they probably need to be and. they're it's going to be a long time. before.

they trickle down into our everyday. lives. It'll probably happen first in the realm. of computing. Um, but In the realm of computing. meeting like quantum computers. >> computers. Yeah. Uh which I think are devices that are. going to facilitate communication across. the fourth dimension, you know. Sure. I. we're even seeing that proven in labs. now. Yes, absolutely. Uh. but yes, I mean, potentially, you know, any any anytime. you're talking about vastly superior.

energy sources like quantum like. zero-point energy or. or whatever or time travel, you know, it's like you these are disruptive. things that could be turned into. weapons. Uh. so there are there are probably very. good reasons why we don't know about. about them, but it's also. uh makes one incredibly angry that if. there are better fuel sources uh. out there that. the oil companies have been suppressing.

uh. Which I firmly believe. >> Which I firmly believe as well. Uh that's. that's. uh that needs to end, you know, and we. need to do what we can to to end that. Uh and bring these. at least some of these technologies to. humanity and solve our problems rather. than create more problems with the. planet. >> I see this this fight between Young and. Freud in all your your work. This where. you you lean into sort of this positive.

view and then then you just you pull it. right back. Like, "Ah, okay, we're not. going to get there. >> [laughter]. >> We're not going to get there." No, I'm. not saying we're not going to get there. You're not? I No, I I think eventually. uh but there are a lot of opposing. forces, you know. Yep. Well, I. at least looking at at time loops and. how you basically solved the grandfather. paradox for me, which we'll get into. specifically. I don't think we've turned time travel. into a weapon because we haven't.

I've heard things. What have you heard? I've heard that there are. there are. weapons. based on manipulation of time. That. That's literally all I've heard, but I. have heard that and I don't. What do I do with that? I don't know, but you know. >> Well, did that source tell you what the. actual practical mechanism is? >> didn't know and they didn't know either. That they're telling me something that. they had heard from somebody who'd heard. it. So, like, you know, that's that's. that's the problem with this whole.

whole field is you're dealing with. people who've heard rumors from people. who've heard rumors. >> But I believe it. Everything that we. know about Stargate. >> makes sense. It makes sense to me. Uh. you know, if the. uh the Nazi Die Glocke Sure, the bell. stuff is real, uh then certainly. we. have done something with that. uh and and Well, if you're working on. anti-gravity, you're working on time. Right. Right. These are all connected.

Uh so, yeah, if you have anti-gravity. technology, you have kind of time. manipulation technology. So, they all go. together. You know. Okay, I'm trying not to let you scare. me. >> [laughter]. >> But I do believe it. Um. I don't know if we should take a quick. break before No, we can we can get into. the block universe. And that cuz I think. that's. that's sort of the. the the structural pillars of a lot of. this is is block universe, what that is, and we can kind of. just create the foundation for for.

people who are maybe new to that. Mhm. Sure. So, what is the block universe? Uh so, when Einstein. published his first paper on special. relativity in 1905, I think. Um he wasn't thinking cosmologically, whatever. He was just he was. he was dealing with questions of light. and and. how light works and how. reference frames work.

But his math teacher, Hermann Minkowski, saw the implications of what he was. saying, that. if this is true, which it seems to be, then. >> true? Connecting. >> If If relativity special relativity is. true. If there's no objective reference frame, then. there is a point of view.

on any moment. that feels open-ended that from which. it's actually in the past and it's. already happened. So, you and I sitting. here talking right now, we feel like. we're. uh we are. you know, moving through a timeline that. is open-ended and have no idea what's. going to happen next and you can. say and then you know, 10 seconds. and I wouldn't predict it, whatever. But. there's a point of view. on which all of this is already. happened. So, it's So, so just as we.

think of the past as solid and fixed, the future is also solid and fixed. And. what he called this was the space-time. continuum and he put a hyphen in there, space-time continuum. And it's come to. be called the block universe because you. can sort of visualize it as a big. block in which there's one of the. dimensions is time. And so, we're all. flowing we're all we may think we're. just. you know, bodies moving through the.

universe, but in from that. four-dimensional perspective, we're. worms. We're snakes. We're sneaking. through that four-dimensional block. And. the present moment is a cross-section. It's a three-dimensional cross-section. of that four-dimensional reality. Uh and that again, that future already. exists. Um and. theoretically can interact with the past. in different ways. You can have uh. things like what we call wormholes now, uh which were theorized actually pretty.

early. um and uh By Einstein. By. Einstein-Rosen, yeah? Uh yeah, but. before that, I think um it was Gödel. who who solved Einstein's field. equations in a way to show that you. could have a path through space-time. that actually wound up in your own past. >> Yes. And you know, and this was you know, Einstein was not thinking in these. terms. He was not And in fact, he was. initially kind of he was initially just. as alarmed by the idea of time travel as.

pretty much anyone is because the the. first thing you think is like, "Wait, wait, wait, no, no, no, that that can't. happen and that would lead to paradox. and blah, blah, blah." He thought that, too, but then he came around because his. colleagues showing him, "No, no, no, this this the math shows that this is. possible." Mhm. Uh and then we have, yeah, things like wormholes where you. could have, you know, create a create a. passage through space, but if you you. take one of those whole one of the. mouths of the wormhole and you move it. in near the surface of a black hole and. then move it back out, then they're out.

of sync with each other and you can have. time travel between those. >> Right. Um so, uh yeah, so there's and then there's. other possibilities, you know, warp. drives, Alcubierre warp drives and so. on, which are. time machines as well as space machines. Um. so, the block universe, yeah, is sort of. the. the basic premise. uh that makes all of this possible. And. it's still not really questioned among.

most physicists. So, this kind of throws. away the many worlds interpretation, yes? Yeah, as far as I'm concerned, it. does. >> So, can you explain that cuz this is. mind-blowing to me. Um as I told you. earlier, I did an episode on. synchronicities based on Young's. famous scarab story. >> Mhm. And part of my research was time. storms. And I was halfway through the. episode and I went, "Well, I'm. wrong about all this." And it doesn't. happen a lot where someone just changes. my whole point of view on a specific. topic, but you did because I think you.

solved the grandfather paradox. Well, do you want to talk about the the. the the scarab story? >> We can do that, yeah. Yeah, well, I. mean, this is honestly this is my. favorite example of a time loop. It. really is the best illustration of a of. what I mean by a time loop. Um okay, so. for people who don't know, uh. this patient came into Young's office. one morning, let's say, and she had she. told him a dream that she had had the. night before that someone.

gave to her. this piece of jewelry in the shape of a. Egyptian scarab beetle. And right as she's telling him this. dream, he hears a tap on the window. behind him and he turns around and. there's a uh. a rose chafer beetle, which was sort of. the European equivalent of the of the. dung beetle or the scarab. And he opens. the He was a. Whatever you all see want to say about. Young, he was a brilliant shaman. Yes. >> opened his window, took the beetle,

handed it to her and said, "Here's your. scarab." And it was like this like. mind-blowing. moment for both of them. >> Yes. Uh and you know, he said that it was the. moment that opened her his patient up to. mysteries and so on. It It was really a. decisive turning point in her in her uh. treatment. Now, he sort of described this. and he used the term synchronicity to.

sort of collapse this sort of time. dimension and say, "Time doesn't matter. here. You know, this was you know, she's. telling the story about a scarab and. then a scarab shows up." But really what. was happening, you know, she had a. precognitive dream. This was not. synchronicity. This was This was. something unfolding in time in the wrong. direction. You know, this woman had a. precognitive dream about being handed a. scarab beetle. And lo and behold, the next morning it. happens. And well, anyone who keeps a. dream journal and is aware of. precognition like, "Yep, that's what.

happens." But in this case, what makes. it What makes that so hard for people to. grasp is that "Well, wait, it was her. telling him her dream that got him to. open the window and give him the. scarab." Like, without that element, you. know, this would not have happened. So, they. think they'll Is that a paradox? But. it's it's not a paradox. It's actually a. loop. It's a tautology because her dream. caused her to tell her doctor the dream, which caused the doctor to know to turn.

around and and see. a scarab beetle and give her. the the the the the beetle, and which is. what caused her dream in the first. place. So, it is a loop. It is a causal. loop. What blew my mind was she wasn't. seeing the future, she was remembering. it. She was remembering the future, yeah. She wasn't seeing the future, she. was remembering it. Uh in a way or. pre-remembering. So, so sending. information back Yes. >> to her. Yes, to her younger self. So, she didn't really have to do anything.

It was It was going to happen. She. remembered it happened. >> Yes. That's what's kind of once you. get your mind around it, which isn't. that hard if you just if you just let. everything else go, many worlds, all. that. Mhm. She's just it just unfolded. I think you call it the back story, yeah? >> Yes. Yeah. Yeah. So, that her. her dream was part of the back story of. that event happening in the office. Um. and but you can't. you know, when you tell a story like. this that's the problem I always have. with my books is like how do you tell. these these anecdotes because really.

cause. cause if causation is circular like that. uh you could start the story anywhere. You know, you could start the story with. the Beatles showing up at the window or. you could start the story. anywhere in that in that in that. narrative. Uh it's all sort of equally causal. Um. and that throws us off because we're. used to linear stories. We're used to. stories being linear. Uh and. uh so, it's very it's hard to wrap our. heads around that. But that's it's the.

opposite of a paradox. A paradox is something that can't. happen. Right. A tautology is something that must. happen and therefore is not interesting. in a way or not interesting to a. logician because, you know, like uh you. know, it's not fair to to defend an. argument by its. and antecedents is it? Yeah, right. But. but it's the way the world works, I. think. So In a time travel universe in. any universe where time travel or time. traveling information is allowed, then.

everything on some level is. tautological. Um. You said it must happen. That sounds. like teleology to me. That sounds like. Plato and Aristotle. >> [snorts]. >> This is it's teleology. This is the. whole reason why people reject this. is because. in the time of Francis Bacon, Francis. Bacon is the is the one who who rejected. teleology from the story of science. Let's explain teleology. That's Yeah. So, teleology is one So, Aristotle. codified these I think four different.

kinds of causation. And one of them one of them was. efficient causation. That's what we. understand as causation. You know, one. thing leading to another like billiard. balls. But one of them was. teleological causation. That is to say. the end, you know, telos meaning the. end. Uh. you know, in some sense causing what. happened before it. Now, this was. a part of the Aristotelian. framework for centuries. Uh but then in the 1500s.

Francis Bacon. uh sort of one of the first. real thinkers about. trying to create what we now think of as. the sciences. He wrote and I'm blanking on the name of. his book, but he he he wrote this book. in which he, you know, basically laid. out what causation was and and banned. teleological causation. He we can't you. know, we can't accept, you know, causation from the future. Uh.

and but the reason was that. teleology. at that time. the only teleology people could could. imagine was God's divine plan. Okay? And. the idea was getting rid of. taking God out of the equation. Taking. God out of the scientific equation. So, what they did was throw the baby. with the bathwater. Really. They they they threw out. teleology and ever since then it has. been rule numero uno in science that.

causes travel in a single direction. And. you know, you can't have anything that. defies that unilinear causal story. But. your future is pulling you toward this. result. Yes, that's what I'm that's what I'm. arguing a lot what what more and more. physicists are arguing is that no no. retrocausation. That's the new word for teleology. Yes. Uh sort of a non-divine. teleology. And we'll get to that later.

Um not just in theory, but in practice. how and some of the cool experiments. that proving that. Before we go to the. break and we'll I would like love to. come back with a couple more time loop. stories cuz people love those and then. talk about creativity. Mhm. Yeah, sounds. great. But the last question is. why are we. wired, programmed, evolved to perceive. time in this linear way? That is a great question and I don't. have an answer to it. Um. I don't think anybody does. I was hoping. you had something, but.

Well, you can I mean, you can speculate. about why it's important for an organism. to perceive time in a in a certain way. and not another way. Um. I can certainly say that you you can. imagine why. you would want to perceive only the. present moment. Or perceive only. um. a very narrow slice of time. that was synchronized with.

what's happening in your environment in. your body and so on. Like I don't I. don't want to. I don't want to be responding right now. to what's going to happen in 10 seconds. That's Right. Worry about the bear. Don't worry about the future. >> Right. Yeah, you worry about what's. happening right now. So, that's going to. create uh sort of a collapsing of. of. you know, it's not going to be helpful. It's not really going to be adaptive. to be precognitive all the time. Just. the same way it's not going to be. adaptive if I'm only responding now to. something that happened 10 minutes ago.

Okay, you want to be responding in the. moment to something happening in the. moment. And if you're you're going to. survive. Now, there's going to be a. certain advantage to having a certain. amount of memory Yep. for things that. have already happened but which might. happen again. Likewise, there's going to be a certain. advantage for knowing what's having an. inkling of what's coming down the pike. Inklings and intuition. >> And intuition. So, yeah, what we're. talking about when we talk about. precognition is what we're really. talking about intuition. What has always. been called intuition. Um and.

uh the. what I'm arguing is that intuition is. really based on real, you know, real. signals from a real future and it's not. just calculating. the odds of something happening based on. what's happened in the past. Uh it's. actually getting signals. indirect. and fuzzy signals from an actually. existing future. That's a great. cliffhanger. We'll be right back. We're. back. Can we define um. what precognition is or at least how you. define it? Yeah, precognition is.

being influenced by. a future experience in some way. Now, that could be. Some Some people will say seeing the. future. I don't think it works that way. I don't think it's a kind of perception. I think it's a kind of memory. I think. it's memory going in the opposite. direction, basically. But being. influenced by a future emotional. experience, for instance, or just an. interesting experience, something.

something salient in the landscape of. your future that exerts an influence on. you in the present. Now, via a dream, via intuition we were talking about, via. uh a lot of people when they're. meditating will have flash. kind of visions when they're meditating. Uh these often turn out to be. precognitive. Um. people who are prone to sort of. having a vivid imagination or very. suggestive, uh you know, they'll have.

visions that are or they'll hear hear. voices. For it's every it's different. for everybody. Um but they'll in one way. or another it's that the future future. experience kind of leaking into the. present. uh and influencing you. So, if dreams. are. I know we don't really know, but if it's. consolidation of memories, organization. of memories. that would make a lot of sense that it's. connected to this phenomenon. Yeah, it. makes every bit of sense based on what. we you know, what mainstream. psychologists will tell you about. dreams, which is that they're involved.

in the making of memories. Well, uh. that [snorts]. if if precognition is a form of memory. that and if at night your. long-term memory is being sort of formed. based on recent experience or past. experience, well, then why not future. experience as well? >> And you're a long time journaler, yeah? Yes. >> [clears throat]. >> Yeah, I. I got really interested in.

I've been interested in dreams my whole. life, but I. had a uh one of my professors in. graduate school in the early '90s was a. psychoanalyst, actually. And so, I had. some seminars on psychoanalysis and. Freud. and. got very interested in. dreams. through that. And I started keeping a. dream journal. Uh I would say in the mid-'90s, '94, '95. That you still keep it up? Yeah,

when I can. I am I have little kids now. and Right. [laughter] I understand. And. that it's it makes a lot of things hard. Uh but. uh yeah, as much as much as I can, I. still I still keep a dream journal. I. used to keep an electronic dream. journal. I used to keep a Word file open. Well, back in the '90s it was Word. Perfect. I had I still have old Word. Perfect files that I can't open because. I you know, they were password protected and they're. now on little floppies or whatever. I. Who knows what's in those? You must be a. badass lucid dreamer.

You know, I'm not that great at lucid. dreaming. Yeah, no, I I we were talking. about lucid dreaming before the the show. and I'm I went through a period when I. was really really into it and I was. having some some luck and and all every. now and then I'll have a lucid dream, but uh it's not like a regular thing for. me and I'm. I used to be better at sort of getting. into a lucid. state from meditating on the edge of. sleep. Uh I sort of had a technique and. I kind of lost it. I lost the knack. But. then again, I you know, when you have. kids, you kind of like you don't have.

time for that stuff. You know, it's. really hard to do. It it a lot of. practice. >> does. It does. Um and I I even achieved um an. out-of-body experience. >> I wanted to That was just on the tip of. my tongue. Is lucid dreaming connected. to out-of-body experience, astral. travel? Yeah, I think I think I think. out-of-body experiences are. Well, here here again, this is. controversial, but I I think they're. part of the same spectrum. and that they're they're just. particularly vivid lucid dreams, but I.

think they're precognitive. Have you. ever had any of these? >> Yes, I've had I've had. I would say I've had. four. definite out-of-body experiences. One. when I was young and I had no way of. you know, no way of processing it. I It. was very cool, but like what the. you know? And. um and then. I had.

a couple of spontaneous ones. in the late '90s, I guess. Um Was something going on in your life? I don't really remember, honestly. I I. did write them down though and and and. one of them turned out to be. you could argue it was precognitive of. what I did right after I got up out of. bed to like. investigate my dream. Uh and then the one that I was able to.

successfully induce after This is after. months of working with like one of the. manuals on how to, you know, have lucid. dreams, one of the modern books. Um. it turned out to be. it was a, you know, kind of a wild, weird, random experience, uh but it turned out to be precognitive. very vividly precognitive of events. exactly a year in the future. Really? Yeah. This is one of the one of the really.

interesting phenomena of of precognitive. dreaming is this. this aspect that I call calendrical. resonance. where you will have a dream about an. event on the exact same day a year later. or multiple years later on the same. date. This is something that anyone who. does precognitive dream work notices. This is it's a it's. a very, very common. uh thing. Last A couple about a week or. two ago, I had a very vivid dream about. Dad and woke up and said, "That was. weird." And it was his death day, which.

I'd forgotten about. Okay, well, this is. why. See, you know, consciously we're. not. aware of the date necessarily. Uh I certainly am not. I like I couldn't. tell you what day it is right now, but. uh unconsciously we're we're aware of. that. And the same. that same kind of process that'll, you. know, "Oh God, I'm feeling sad today.". And then you look at the calendar, it's. like, "Oh, it's the day my dad passed. away.". >> Yes. It's that same process that's. pre-minding you.

Pre-minding? >> Pre-minding you of something that's. going to happen on the same date. in a year or in 10 years or multiple. years. I mean, I've had I've had. precognitive dreams. I My my longest. distance precognitive dream that I've. clocked so far is 26 years. What? >> Yes. You have to tell us what these are. >> Well, some of the problem is most. precognitive dreams are just they're. they're really they're boring like. they're they're not things that would. make really make sense to other people. I could certainly describe it, but it's. not anything that's going to be wow you.

It's not like, you know, a dream about a. terrorist attack or something like that. >> Right. But um nevertheless, it's very. common. Uh anyone who does precognitive dream. work over any length of time will like. tell you, "Yeah, I like you have dreams. that are on the the the pre-anniversary. of events." I had precognitive dreams. about the births about very specific. details of the births of both of my. daughters exactly a year beforehand. Now, that's a year, so it's like, you. know, you can't it's not like 9 months.

It's like it's a year before, you know, exact very specific details. Um. and uh. so I There is there is a way in which we. are unconsciously aware of the date. And it may be, in fact, that dreams are. part of a system that kind of that's not. only consolidating memories, but it's. constructing your internal timeline. Well, what was your one-year one and. your 26-year one? Well, we'll talk about that. Out-of-body. experience first. Um.

uh so. it was it was wild. It was sort of a. two-part experience. Um I I was doing these exercises, these. kind of meditative exercises. to. um. induce an out-of-body experience. And I. had had semi-success. previously, you know, you'll you could. go into a lucid dream. um or you'll have sort of a a sleep. paralysis type experience or you'll have. Kundalini kind of sensations. But this. time, boom, I am.

it feels like I am like. just in a in reality. You skipped all. that hypnagogic Yeah, just go straight. Wow. And. but where I was was I was. down near the floor of a closet in my. hallway. like in front of my wife's shoes. My. wife's shoes She kept her shoes on the. floor of this closet. And I'm like. staring at these at these shoes. I can't.

like really control anything. I'm just. I'm just staring at at my wife's shoes. And it was it was really weird. And then. it Oh, and and oh, and I had a sensation. of being weighed down. I had sort of a a. scary sensation I I was being weighed. down by my cat, Cindy. Uh but I couldn't see her. She was on my. back. She was on my back somehow. weighing me down, okay? On your physical. body or on your astral body? >> my astral body, whatever. Um. and. it's just strange and it and it There.

was it was kind of associated with a. feeling of of terror, almost like that. sleep paralysis kind of feeling of. terror that you have. Um. but in this case. I'm staring at my wife's shoes and my. cat is sitting on my back. And then. it changed and then I was immediately in. my office, which was just like maybe 10. ft. farther down the hall. And I was up by the ceiling of my office. looking down. through the window onto the street. below.

And it was like my you know, it was like. my office. I was in my office and I was. looking down through the window, but I. was up by the ceiling looking down. through the window and there was these. two green lights that. that looked like eyes, kind of like. green eyes looking at me, but there was. no face or anything like that. But it. was kind of spooky. Like like these two. green eyes, glowing eyes looking at me. And then so I It was at this point This. is probably This is all unfolding over. the span of maybe 10 seconds. Okay. Uh I remembered the main instruction of.

the manual that I was following, which. was keep your flights short. Go back to your body immediately because. you were not going to remember it. otherwise. It'll pull you out. Yes. So. uh so I. I. I don't I [snorts] don't think I had a. sensation of flying back to my body, but. I basically just woke up at that point. I was like, "Whoa." Wrote it down. Everything. Um. I was you know, I was. I really didn't know what to make of. this experience.

Um. But then. >> [laughter]. >> so exactly a year later. I think this is exact a year minus one. day. I think there was like it was off. by one day. I found I was I had That that closet I. told you about, that's where we keep our. we used to keep our. our. medicines and stuff like that. And. I dropped an Advil. on the floor. And I was down on the floor rummaging. among my wife's shoes looking for that.

Advil that I'd dropped because I was. worried my cat, Cindy, the one that had. been. >> Yes. >> weighing me down. I was worried that she. was going to or had eaten this this. Advil. And there Advil is very toxic to. cats. Yes. So, I couldn't find the Advil. and I wound up taking her to the It was. a whole ordeal taking her to the. hospital to the pet hospital. Did you. remember the experience when you're kind. of rooting around the shoes like, "Oh, shit.". >> remember exactly at what point I. realized put this together. I think it. was the second experience that that that.

that jogged my memory of the of the. out-of-body experience. So, that same day, that same evening, I. I got up on a ladder in my study to. change the light bulb in my study. And I stood up there and I looked down. Sorry, I banged the. That's the guy I'm excited to meet. I looked I I was I was up by the ceiling. of my study and looking down through the. window. And I saw two little green lights. >> Ah, the eyes. And it wasn't eyes. It was It was my It.

was my power cord from my laptop. It was. an Apple laptop that has a little green. diode. >> This guy right here. >> Right there. It was the green diode, but it was being. reflected in two panes of glass. There. was two green dots. And it's something I. wouldn't have been able to see if I was. down on the floor, but I saw it. up up from where I was. And that's what I think I go, "Oh my. god, this is this is the scene from my. out-of-body experience." So, I like.

And then I think I pieced together the. rest of it. that this was not an out-of-body. experience. It was an a precognitive. precognitive of an in-body experience at. a different location later in my life. >> You were on the. >> I was I was on a ladder. Now, I know a lot of people have. out-of-body experiences which they. experience they see their bodies. So, like so I'm not saying that that's what. all out-of-body experiences are, but I. think a hypothesis that people should. consider. uh who are interested in this.

topic and who are able to achieve these. things. which is it's very it's very difficult. I've never been able to do it again. Can. anybody learn this though? Yeah, theoretically. The the book I was. following Now, I have a lot of books on. out of body experiences including some. of the old classics like. I forget. There's a really great book. from like the 1930s that's fantastic and. I wish I could remember the name of it, but there's a a more modern teacher. uh in Australia named Robert Bruce who.

does sort of body work kind of stuff. uh and he wrote a very. very good guide. Now, I don't agree with. his. cosmology and you know, I don't I'm. about what's happening whatever, but he. his techniques are very sound I think. and they and he he really gets you know, he really understands how you induce. these things. So, I was I was following. his his guide. I think that Astral. Dynamics is his book. He's like awake to sleep method that. type of thing?

Uh no, it's it's more. it involves meditating is most learning. to meditate on different parts of your. body and feel sensations in your. throughout your body sort of a body scan. kind of thing. That's very crucial. honestly and I've found it to be really. important just for meditating in general. to like it's counterintuitive, but. you're going to access that that. precognitive thing by focusing on. physical sensations. Really? Yeah. Okay. Yeah. And anyway, so learning to sort of.

scan your body. and feel kind of energetic sensations in. all parts of your body is what is kind. of the doorway to having these. experiences according to him and it. worked. in one case for me. So, for people listening that want to. start. you know, I'm asked about lucid dreaming. all the time cuz I'm obsessed with it. I. say dream journal is the at that is the. gateway. You must start. You can't do it. without like. and the more you journal at least in my. experience, the better you get at. remembering. Yes? >> Right. Absolutely. Do you go back to.

your journal and when things when. something feels weird? Um sometimes. You know what? The. >> [clears throat]. >> So, the pioneer of precognitive dream. work was a guy named. um. uh J.W. Dunne. um who I talk about in all my books, but. he was a aeronautical engineer in the. early. 20th century. Um and he recommended he. lived in a time when you know, records. took up physical space and uh so, he. recommended just keeping 3 days worth of.

of dream records and then throwing them. out. >> Oh, no. Yeah. [laughter] Yeah, because I. mean like it would quickly you know, on. my dream journals I printed them out for. a while and that. turned into binders that were really. thick and that's just from a few years. Did you tell us your 26-year. precognition? Did you tell us? No, I. didn't I didn't tell you that one. >> to remember that one. Okay. It's not. that interesting, but it it was. interesting to me, but it was not Well, these are all very personal. Yeah, they're very very personal. Yeah. But. uh the point is no one would have the. time.

to let alone storage space. to record every dream over the course of. your life and compare every dream over. the course of your life to every. experience over the course of your life. So, he confined it to just like go. through the last 3 days dream records. you know, and catch those. short-term. you know, precognitive dreams. Um but yeah, it. becomes too big a task. I you know, I. know someone who's um. you know, who's who lives this reality.

totally and she's. you know, she keeps you know, voluminous. dream records and goes through and. tracks every every you know, every. connection between her dreams and. reality and and and it's it's. mind-boggling. You know, it's. mind-boggling but like I I would drive. me crazy. It's a great task for AI. because it's great [clears throat] at. pattern recognition. That's yes, if AI. is aware of your actual waking life. experiences. >> Sure. See? Like you test you have to be. recording not only your dreams, but you.

have to like be recording everything and. you know, that quickly becomes an. unmanageable. sort of task. Well, tell us your 26-year. dream and then you had a 9/11 dream, didn't you? Yeah. Mhm. Okay. The 26-year dream. was. this. it was a dream about being in this. um. uh. a certain environment um I'm blanking on. the name of the artist um.

uh gosh, the. he was sort of a precursor of the. surrealists, but um. It'll come to you. Yeah, it'll come to. me. Anyway, I was in this very specific. environment in this very. moving around this square. uh there was a character with a gun. firing a gun. It was just it was. it was very stage play like and very. much like the work of this certain. painter. >> [snorts]. >> Uh and.

and the scenario was very specific and. it. I wrote it down at the time, but I've. always remembered that dream cuz it was. just it was just so. particular and specific. And. um. and then this past year I was reading a. book about another artist and they. talked about um. uh about this artist.

that I'm that was exactly what happened. in my. dream and I. uh and it was just like whoa and it. really struck me and then there was. something else on that page that was. like really like. amazing like mind-blowing to me. It was. like really an important reading. experience. What was that? I I it's too. personal. It's too personal to say, but. I. I thought my god, this is my dream that. I had that that one dream I had. So, I. went back to my dream journals and guess. what? It was the same date. Holy.

>> 26 years earlier. Calendrical? Calendrical. I just I think. this is happening all the time and we're. just not aware of it because you know, who who A, who records their dreams? If they do record their dreams, do they. go back to their dream records? Probably. not. If they you know, >> Yeah, that's the thing. I like I kept. you know, I kept dream records for. decades without even before I was aware. of the topic of precognitive dreams. Uh. and it's only like well, thanks to the. fact that I had been keeping those dream. records uh I've been able to identify a.

lot of precognitive dreams from that. time period. Um but. you know, most precognitive dreams go. undetected. You know, so I think this is. the this is the the mental shift people. have to make. People think that oh, if. you had a precognitive dream, it must be. something super significant and there's. a reason you were you had this. premonition or whatever. No, I think. it's a I think it's an automatic process. that we're brain is constantly doing. this uh and we're just not aware of it. Could our dreams just be littered with. all these just minutia of the future?

>> absolutely Yeah, it's minutia of the. future. That's a great way of putting it. because the they're so minute and. specific that uh they're hard to tell. these stories to other people often. I. mean, it's it's the dreams about plane. crashes and 9/11 and stuff like that. that you know, that makes a good enough. story to tell someone else. But you. know, just having a. a dream about some very random specific. personal experience in your day um. you know, that's it's.

it makes it's meaningful to you. Right, I spilled coffee on my shirt. It's bothering me, but you dreamed about. that 2 days ago in some way. You can't really recognize it because it. hasn't happened. Right. Right. Exactly. Exactly. Exactly. It's difficult to get. your mind around it, but but I love it. So, what is it about 9/11 cuz if there's. a lot of precognitive dreams about 9/11. Is there I I would bet that everybody. dreamed about 9/11 before it happened. Were you in New York? No, I wasn't. I.

was in I had just moved to Washington. D.C. actually a week beforehand. [clears throat] I I'd moved on September. 1st uh 2001. Um I was I was living in a suburb. of D.C. and working in [clears throat]. Tenleytown neighborhood which is. far away from the Pentagon. Um in fact, as it was happening and. people were saying planes hit the. Pentagon and stuff like that is like it. took me long time to realize oh wait, that's. >> [laughter]. >> that's where I live now. Uh. >> Yeah. But no, the that that morning and.

I still have the dream record. It was. you know, uh it was just a dream about. two identical buildings. that had this these corrugated gray. facades and they were mosques somehow. Oh boy. And uh and there are other details in. the dream which I sort of decoded. afterwards that also made sense in terms. of the events, but um. you know, okay, that's weird. I wrote it. down. Um and I don't even think that. as the events were happening I was.

thinking of that dream. I think it was. the next day that I looked at my dream. record and go oh I. sort of had a dream about this or. related to this. But it's like you know, I had no never before or since have I. dreamed about two identical square. buildings that have like gray corrugated. facades. The the topic of Islam and was not on my. radar at all until that morning of 9/11. when suddenly it became came on. everyone's radar. >> Right. Um and I'd never you know, I was. able to do an electronic search of my.

records you know, did the term mosque. ever show up? No. You know, that's the. one. you know, the one dream one time in my. life I've ever dreamed about mosques and. or anything related to Islam. Um. uh you know, so you know, but it you. know, and there were symbolic aspects of. the dream that I I don't want to go into. to sort of again and personal, but that. related to the topic of suicide. Uh and. >> which makes sense again in terms of the. events of that day.

So, if lots of people are remembering. 9/11 pre-remembering, they're not having. an out-of-body experience. They're not. experiencing it. It's They're more. reminding themselves of just watching. the news. >> of watching CNN. Yeah. >> Wow. Yeah. Yeah, there's a lot of stories like. this. Um. in one of your books you talk about the. Michael Richards case. Yeah. Would you. mind. regaling us? I know you told me a million times. This. is a great story. >> wild. Yeah, it's it's one of the best. stories, honestly. I mean, uh well,

tragic, but I mean, one of the most. clear stories, I think, of. of precognition in the arts. Uh so. >> invite everybody to look this up as. you're telling the story. >> Yeah, yeah, just look up Michael. Richards. And then we're not talking. about Michael Richards, the comedian who. was on Seinfeld. We're talking about. Michael Rolando Richards, who was a. sculptor in New York in the 1990s. He. was an up-and-coming young. uh. uh Jamaican-American. sculptor. And.

over the last couple years of the of the. '90s, he made a series of sculptural. self-portraits. of himself. dressed as a uh. in a flight suit. Um. where he was. he had fallen to the ground, parachuted. parachuted to the ground, or where he. was. crashing to the ground, or. and in the most famous case, he's. standing vertically erect in a flight.

suit, and he's being pierced by multiple. little airplanes. Okay? Well, sort of on the strength of his growing. body of work, he he. uh got this uh got studio space in Tower. One. Yep. >> Uh the Lower Manhattan Cultural Council. gave out studio space to a a cohort of. like 15 artists twice a year. Um so, they would spend 6 months in their. studios. uh high in the towers, and then there.

would be an exhibition at the end. They'd show their work. Anyway, so he was one of the summer. 2001 cohort. Uh and he was working. apparently based on people who had see. visited his studio. uh before the attacks, uh he was working. on. Let's see, a self-portrait of himself. riding a burning meteor. And another self-portrait of himself as. a fallen angel, of his torso like having.

fallen to the ground. Okay? >> And so, he was the only one of that. artist cohort who was in his studio. He. had stayed the night in the studio on. the night of of 9/11 and was killed in. the attacks. The night He was on the. 92nd floor, and that was the That was. the uh the 91st floor was the top floor. from which anyone was able to escape the. building. Uh so, you know, but that just that one He and. he had a lot lots of um.

uh sculptures also of planes, planes. crashing. Uh there's a watercolor that he did of a. of a plane burning plane. You know, just. the incre incredible imagery. And just but there's that one sculpture, which is called Tar Baby versus Saint. Sebastian, uh of himself being pierced by. airplanes. And that he died as a martyr. on. on 9/11. uh is is just,

you know, stunning. >> It is. stunning. The other artist was. was it Stephen Mandel? Oh, yeah. David Mandel. >> David Mandel. Yes. So, this is a. a I don't know if he's still alive, actually. He was already He was a. retired uh art teacher. living in London. And he had a history a life history of. precognitive dreams. And he what he did. was he painted watercolors of his. dreams. And anyway, on the morning of.

September 11th, this is here is another. calendrical resonance example. On the. morning of September 11th, 1996, he wakes up from a dream in which the. Twin Towers in New York are collapsing. And he. he actually does a drawing of it. And he goes what he always did when he. had a dream that he thought might be. precognitive, he would go to he would. take the drawing to his local Barclays. Bank building. Okay, and have himself photographed. under the clock of the Barclays Bank to.

have the date. So, for a date stamp, okay? Again, we. can see this photo. >> We can see the photo, yes. Um and. anyway, then a few months later, he had. a dream about planes crashing into the. towers. And he did a watercolor of that, too. Uh and so, 5 years to the day. after that one dream, is this what got you interested in. creativity? No. No, these cases I mean, there are so. many cases like They're They're not.

necessarily as vivid as that, but uh. I. >> But artists seem to be sensitive to. this. Yes. Yes, anyone who's creative um. using their imagination, they're tapped. in to their, you know, intuitive. precognitive. uh abilities. And the this when I wrote. my first book on precognition um called. Time Loops, it was the connections to creativity. that really interested me the most, even. more than dreams. Uh because, you know, partly like a lot of people don't. identify with dreams. You know, like.

some people who are really into dreams. really. love hearing about dreams, but but a lot. of people don't really want to hear. >> No. You know? Uh but everyone can. connect to creativity in some way. If. not in the arts, in the sciences, whatever, you know. Just flow state. >> Flow state, yeah. And. uh. I was really intrigued. You know, honestly, it was Philip K. Dick that. that because he he had regular. precognitive dreams, and he was very. aware of his how his stories played out.

in his life afterwards. And so, he was. like It was Philip K. Dick was really. the first case. And also Morgan. Robertson, the who wrote the story about. the Titanic. Well, tell that story, and. then let's get into Philip K. Dick, because he's everybody's favorite. >> Yeah. >> So, Morgan Robertson, which I covered, was the Titanic story. Yeah, the Titanic. story. So, so in. 1898, Morgan Robertson, he's this sort of science fiction. writer, uh writes this novel called Futility. about the biggest ocean liner ever.

called the Titan, which hits an iceberg on an on its third. voyage. This is the unsinkable Titan in. the novel. I don't know. Yeah, yeah, it's called unsinkable. Yeah, and it's. uh it's on its third voyage between. Liverpool and and New York. I think. going from New York to Liverpool in this. case. Uh and it strikes an iceberg, and almost. all the passengers die because there's. not not enough lifeboats. And that's. even like a plot point in the story. >> Yeah. Uh. and uh so, 14 years later,

you know, he's as stunned as everyone. else uh to read the New York Times. headline that that, you know, that the. Ti- Titanic, you know, sinks, and and most of the. passengers are lost because there's not. enough lifeboats. So, you know, really. incredible uh story. And that's been. looked at a lot, you know, it's That's. That's one of the most famous Well, he. also wrote about World War I later on as. well. Let's see. Yeah, he wrote about He had a. number of stories that people have. argued were prescient of things. Uh it's.

been argued that he. sort of precognized like technical. developments like sonar, things like that. >> Um. and he he He's another one of these. artists who is his life was full of. synchronicity, okay? >> [snorts]. >> Uh you know, I argue synchronicity is. what it feels like when we're. precognitive and we don't know it, you. know? Yes. Feels like like, you know, wait a minute, you know, like how can. these coincidences be happening? And. it's your own precognitive uh brain.

that's guiding you through life, and. you're you know, and because you don't. have a concept of precognition, you're. like surprised by it. Uh but uh but. yeah, I think that's, you know, I think. it's it's precognition, really. But yeah, so so Philip K. Dick Before. you jump to that, just so just to. connect this to people listening, everyone has that experience where. you're thinking of somebody random, and. they call. Everyone has it. >> Everybody. Everybody. Yes. So, Philip K. Dick, who invented precog, right? Minor Minority Report? Uh no,

it's actually another one of his stories. I think in which he used the term precog. first. But yes, he sort of he's the. inventor of the term precog. >> [snorts]. >> Um. and it. precognition factors into a lot of his. fiction. And he was himself. very aware of precognition. occurring in his life, and he was. thoughtful very thoughtful about it. Um. and his. uh so, he was aware of how his He would.

write a story, and there'd be a. character or some sort of plot element. in the story, and then. and then it this he would meet this. character in real life, or he would read. an an article like he was a He was an. avid reader of like popular science. magazines and stuff like that. And he. would, you know, like like he wrote you know, he basically wrote about split-brain. research in um. um Scanner Darkly. >> Scanner Darkly, and then like 6 months. later, before the novel came out, but.

you know, he read an article in. Scientific American or something like. that about split-brain research, you. know? And all kinds of examples like. that. And uh. he's a wonderful case because. you can not only see it happening with. his fiction, but you can see it. happening with his dreams, because he. wrote tons of letters and and we have. his letters. And if you want to shell. out a couple hundred dollars, you can. buy his letters, which I did, and it's. totally worth it. Yeah, if there's any. Yeah, if there's two things I recommend.

people shelling out the money for, it's. it's Philip K. Dick's letters and. Jacques Vallee's journals. You know, those are the. >> Can you get those? Journal Yes. Jacques. Vallee's journals, are you kidding? >> I got to write that down. Forbidden. Science, volumes 1 through 6. Yeah. Um. But anyway, so you can go through his. letters and see him like telling his. like he had this pen pal in the late. 70s. Um. Um I'm blanking on her name, but uh he. you know, he'd write these long.

uh. letters uh to this person and tell about. these dreams he was having and um and a. lot of the kind of the rudiments of what. became his exegesis or he can find in. his letters. But he was having dreams. that then would play out in his life and. in his a lot of cases he wouldn't. identify himself. Like I I I think this. is in Time Loops, I talk about a dream. he had. that he was clearly precognizing Close.

Encounters. Like like 3 years before the movie came. out, but it's like it's uncanny. the connections between this dream and. Close Encounters. And we know from his. journals that he was really fascinated. with that movie. Like when it came out, he got all excited about UFOs and he was. reading UFOs and he was reading Jacques. Vallee. Yes. And uh there are interesting. precognitive connections, I think, between him and Jacques Vallee going on. Yeah, you have to tell us but wasn't. there one that was mind-blowing where. Jacques Vallee pre-remembered something. about a a a PKD story?

Uh Maybe it was the. Valis? Well, so I. I argue. that it's an argument, you know, it's. hard it'd be hard to summarize the. argument. So it's a fun show. Yeah, but. [laughter] you know, I think that Valis. I think is Vallee. Mhm. Um. because. So what what's the story here? Jacques Vallee in 1974. wrote the book we talked about before,

Invisible College, where he develops the idea of UFOs as. control system and he talks about. psychic phenomena and talks about Uri. Geller and talks about uh and he floats. the idea. that. um that. extraterrestrials could be broadcasting. educational. material to us, like Radio Free Europe. >> [laughter]. >> Okay? Okay? So. exactly at the same time. but a year before his book is published.

Philip K. Dick has his famous 2-3-74. experience. and starts writing a novel based on it. And the first we have the first version. of this novel, which is called we we. which was published after his death as. Radio Free Albemuth. Okay? Right. And it's about this teaching satellite. that broadcasts things to awaken. sensitive people on Earth. You know, it's basically it's a basically the. premise of Jacques Vallee's book, but.

Jacques Vallee's book had not come out. yet. They did not know each other. Um Can you imagine running into them at. a Berkeley bar? Oh, man. >> [laughter]. >> Oh, wow. >> two people I would love to, you know, get together in a room. >> Yeah. Um. but. you know, at that time we know that that. Philip K. Dick was hearing voices. He. was hearing, you know, that he would get. these names that came to him at night. Um he would get, you know, these ideas. that came to him. He even thought he was.

the subject of a of an ESP experiment. Uh which I don't rule out. You know, He'd be the guy. He'd be the guy. Um. and uh. I think it's it's more than uncanny that. he winds up he he calls this. extraterrestrial control system Valis. And it actually looks like a French. word, Vallee. >> It does. And uh he and I know, because I. confirmed this with uh Tessa Dick, that.

in 1977, like 3 years later, same year that Close Encounters came. out, he got really into UFOs and was. reading Jacques Vallee's books. She. couldn't remember the titles of Jacques. Vallee's books, but the most recent one. was Invisible College. So I basically. I'm certain that he read Invisible. College 3 years later. He must have. And. I think he was precognizing it when he. was crea- crafting initially crafting. the story that became Valis. Um.

but you know, long before he could read. uh. before he did or even could read Jacques. Vallee's work. So I think there's a a. connection going on there. Did you find. any others with Phil Dick just for the. fans like me in his work that was. precognition? Any other. >> Any other just examples that of PKD. predicting the future? Oh. I don't mean to put you on the spot. I. was just curious. >> [snorts]. >> Um.

No, just dreams where he would predict. something in his life, basically. But um. I mean Well, when the end. >> the world becomes more and more Phil. Dickian It does. >> uh by the day. When the androids are. built, we're going to remember. Boy, yeah. It's He just Did you ever see his. talk in Metz uh Metz Fest '77? Yeah. Where he talks about um. he was a many worlds guy and he talks. about that Man in the High Castle being. an alternate reality. What do you think. he was seeing if he if many worlds is. not a thing? Uh you know, it.

A person can be precognitive without. having in the correct theory of. precognition. He can be wrong. He can be. wrong. That's uh fine, you know, who. cares? Um. in fact, I there's a part of me that. thinks maybe you have to be wrong Yeah. for it to work. You had a great story about I forget the. author's name of Lolita. Yeah, Nabokov. Nabokov. Okay, so yes. When he was. um. long before he became a famous author, when he was 17, he was this aristocratic.

kid. uh in St. Petersburg, Russia, you know, collecting butterflies and. writing poetry and stuff. Uh and his. Uncle Vasily. dies. and leaves him an estate, basically. So suddenly he is a rich man. and set up for life. And. but a year later. the revolution happens and sweeps away. the wealth of all these aristocrats and. he and his family have to go into exile,

but at that time his Uncle Vasily. appears to him in a dream and says, "I. will come back to you as Harry and. Kuvirkin.". Okay? All right, so. what? Fast forward. 40 some years, I believe. >> Mhm. I can't remember the exact number. He's living in Cornell. or living in Ithaca, New York, working. at Cornell, teaching English at Cornell. and, you know,

subsisting. He's not rich anymore. And he reads a friend calls him up and. says, "Have you read the New York Times. today?" And there's an article in the. New York Times about how. Harris Kubrick Pictures has just. purchased the rights to Lolita. for huge sum, for like something like. 150,000, which at the time was a lot. It. was still still a lot, but it's it was a. huge amount at the time. >> Yeah. And uh. so he learns. basically from the New York Times that.

he is now a rich man. Yep. And. and here's the thing. So it's Harris. Kubrick Pictures. Kuvirkin, if you. Anglicized it, would be Kubrick. Unbelievable. >> Unbelievable. Yeah. And then so he got. interested uh maybe because of that, I. don't know, but he got interested in. precognitive dreams and he got. interested in the writing of J.W. Dunne. Um and Who influenced a lot of writers. Hm? It. >> Yes, who influenced Yes, he influenced a. lot of writers. Uh but uh.

Nabokov. found Dunne's book called An Experiment. with Time. and. read it and replicated his experiment. He did the experiment, which is. basically keep dream records and go back. to your dream records the last few. nights at least and and see see what. matches you get. And lo and behold, he. got several hits, really nice hits of. like exactly the kind of thing you would. expect, which is like uh some like vivid. fantastic scene in your dream and it.

turns out to be a scene in a children's. cartoon that you. see the next day or something like that. So he, you know, in fact, the two best. examples are things he was watching on. TV uh in the following couple days, like. little little scenes in in shows that he. was watching. Um you know, like the bulk of my. precognitive dreams are like things on. Twitter. Sure. Yeah. Um but. uh yeah, so yeah, he's he replicated it. and uh and yeah, J.W. Dunne was hugely.

influential on mid-century writers, J.R.R. Tolkien being. being one of them that people don't. realize. No, um I didn't either until uh. until I read your work. Tolkien. I was like, "Ah, what was the what was the the theory. that Tolkien used um the elves Mhm. cuz. they're sort of immortal and omniscient? >> yeah. Yeah, they they sort of live in. this timeless reality um. uh. that you know, their sort of cosmology. and was based on J.W. Dunne's work and.

Christopher Tolkien found notes. in in his father's uh writings, you. know, he'd found drafts of Lord of the. Rings. uh and notes about Elvish time and and. the elves that were all sort of stuff, including diagrams, taken from J.W. Dunne's books. So, J.W. Dunne was. influential on Tolkien. We don't know. unfortunately if J.R.R. Tolkien ever. kept a dream diary, which would be.

awesome. Which would be awesome. I shall. have that one, too. Yes. >> [laughter]. >> But, um anyway, Dunne's ideas at very least were. influential on him. And and. uh he and C.S. Lewis. talked a lot about. >> Just to wrap Tolkien, he has two. unfinished time travel stories based on. Dunne's work. >> Yes. Which is that's fun. Yes. Yeah, the the. Lost Road is one of them. I forget the. other one, but yes, he started He. started writing a time travel novel. He. and he and C.S. Lewis.

uh because of Dunne's book. they. or maybe it wasn't because of Dunne's. book, but they they challenged each. other. One of them, C.S. Lewis, was going to. write a space travel novel. Uh and. Tolkien was going to write a time travel. novel. And so, he got four four chapters. into it and never finished it. But, uh yeah, and then and. there's there's a precognitive dimension. to that unfinished novel, too,

uh that's pretty interesting that I talk. about in one of my books. But, um yeah, no, J.W. Dunne was a really really. interesting. really interesting person, very. interesting figure. Well, we stumbled on. a segway, and I'm So, I have to pull. another story out of you. We have Lord. of the Rings, we have Peter Jackson, and. we have the Beatles documentary, which. everybody needs to watch. Everybody. needs to watch. Everybody. Yes. So, there's some precognition. there, which I wasn't aware of until you. told the story and. blew my mind. Well, I'm glad I blew your.

mind cuz I was like I was a scared to. tell that one because I thought, "Oh, are people going to just go, 'No.'". I don't know. I mean, some some people. I've suggested this to like looked at me. with skeptical eyes. And it's like, you. know, there's no way of proving this. stuff. That's the problem. That's what. >> unfalsifiable. >> unfalsifiable. So, yes, so all this this. is speculation. But, >> I'm aware that you can make connections. down the road and all that. It's just It's interesting and fun. That's why we're here. >> Right. Um but, yeah, so. So, yes, everyone should watch Get Back.

multiple times. It's It is like one of. the most phenomenal things if you grew. up especially with the Beatles. It's one. of the most phenomenal things ever put. on film. I mean, it's like unbelievable. to be in this room with those. four people uh and just watching their. creative process is just just beyond. interesting. And. so, the the the way the series starts. is uh I'm forgetting the exact dates, but it's like the first few days of of. what year? 1969?

And they're all in a room kind of. noodling on different musical ideas. And. Paul McCartney is there. sort of noodling on this idea. this musical idea, and he's kind of got. the tune, but he's like he's struggling. with the words. All he can think of is. get back, get back. get back to where you once belonged. Um. and then Jojo comes in, I think. I have the chronology written down. I I. can't replicate it for you exactly, but.

he you know, a couple days later he. thinks of Jojo. um. uh Jojo left his home in. Tucson, Arizona, whatever. But, so. what? A few days later. George Harrison. leaves the band. This is the big. cliffhanger ending of the first episode. George Harrison leaves the band. Yes. Walks out. See you around the clubs, he. says. And walks out because he's kind of.

basically sick of Paul McCartney at that. point. >> And. so then they have to spend like they. have to like make three visits to I. think they all convened at Ringo Starr's. house or whatever to convince George. Harrison to get back to get back to. where he once belonged. And. to add to add to this, that line, Get. Back to Where You Once Belong, is. something that Paul stole from George. Harrison. Right, from another song? >> song George had written.

Uh. Sour Milk Sea is this song that George. had written and given to another another. artist. I forgot who recorded it. But, um. basically Paul took this line, kind of. tweaked it a little bit, made it Get. Back to Where You Once Belong. So, basically he's noodling on this idea. All he's got, you know, to start with is. Get Back, Get Back to Where You Once. Belong, Jojo Jojo. from Arizona, which sounds like. Harrison. Jojarison. Yeah.

>> Anyway, uh. uh and and and and right that morning, the morning before George leaves at. lunchtime. Okay, he he walks out of the. band. He says, "See you around the. pubs." Leaves at lunchtime. That morning. John adds the line, "But, he knew it. wouldn't last.". Wow, that's right. >> [laughter]. >> Yeah, that's worth a rewatch. You'll watch it completely differently. now. But, I mean, you can't prove. >> You can't prove that, but that's the way.

it works though. I mean, these But, Paul. would have They would have liked this. theory. John would have liked this. theory, I think. >> John would have. Yeah. Yeah. Um. that's the way it works. I mean, artists. get inklings of things, and they just. get these ideas like, "Where does this. idea come from?" But, it's like they. have to work through work work it out, you know? Just kind of like uh Roy Neary. in Close Encounters like having a vision. of this. like tower thing and like trying to work. it out. What does it mean? What is it? What is it, you know? And and.

um you know, you can reread that. Close Encounters as precognition if you. want. Like you can reread it as he's. he's he's creating this thing and then. looks over at the television and then. sees what he's been working on. That's. the way it happens in the lives of. artists that they they work out these. ideas and then they they open a. magazine. It's like, "Oh, Jesus, I just. wrote a novel about this idea." Well, any of these stories that are kind of. teleological, we are just sort of drawn. to a conclusion or meant to be, you can.

go back and see that you could be in a. loop. In a loop. Exactly. Exactly. What. is it about creativity and artists and. emotion? Because all these seem to be. tied to emotion, yes? Yeah, I I think. I think it's just that artists are more, you know, sensitive. They're more. they're more in tune with emotional. >> with. Yeah, and more imaginative, more. I think everybody has an imagination. Everybody has an intuition, but some. people are.

they prioritize it. That third eye is always kind of a. little bit open. >> Yes, and they're aware of it, and. they're they're noting it. They're. noting it at least mentally if not on. paper. And that's what that's what it. takes to notice this stuff is you have. to be noting you have to be paying. attention in your life in your waking. life. to make those connections to the dream. world and to the. to the. the world of creativity and and and. stuff. So, like when you're paying. attention, that's why I meant it that. again is another reason why meditation. is so valuable because it gets you to.

pay attention. Mindfulness, you know, just being. mindful. Uh so, that I think the more mindful you. are. the more you are. going to notice this working in your. life. I'm I'm I don't like when people. talk about precognition as some kind of. power or special power that some some. certain individuals have. I think it's I. think it's basic. to our functioning and we're just not. aware of it. And I think it's becoming. aware of it that is what makes you a. precog. You know, I think we're all.

precogs, but a precog is someone like. Philip K. Dick who is aware of this. operating in their life and develops. kind of an understanding of it even if. it's not they're not necessarily. completely correct. They don't need to. be correct about it, but they can be. just aware enough that they're aware. that it's happening. Well, you set up a great cliffhanger. again for the break is because this. isn't magic. This is science and. biology. Yeah. Yeah. I think we can But, those. can be magical. I don't you know, I. don't want to be the kind of materialist.

who says you can't think of it as magic. You know, it it's perfectly fine to. think of it as magic. But, >> is magic. >> Sure. I don't think anyone would Feynman. would say so. Sure. Yeah. All right. So, we can we talk quantum mechanics when we. get back? >> Yeah, sure. All right. See you in a. minute. So, we talked about how Einstein. relativity allows for time travel. We. talked a little bit about creativity. precognition. Let's get into some of the science that. makes this work. I guess I Daryl Bem. could be a good place to start. >> Sure. Yeah.

Yeah, so with that. Daryl Bem [clears throat] Bem's a really. interesting guy. He he's a psychologist. at Cornell. He's emeritus now. Um but, he. So, his story is interesting. He got. interested in. he was never interested in. in parapsychology really until the '90s. I think the early '90s when. uh. a colleague of his, I guess a colleague. or another psychologist anyway named um. Charles Honorton.

uh who was a parapsychologist and doing. parapsychology research wanted. he wanted someone who had training as a. mentalist. to sort of be part of his experiments. because that's a good control. you know, to make sure that there's no. cheating and that and that and so on. And Daryl Bem is a trained mentalist. Uh and he didn't necessarily have an. interest in ESP or whatever, but he. didn't he wasn't. a knee-jerk. You know, he didn't He just didn't know.

anything about it, and he's but he was. game to sort of be part of these. experiments. uh. to uh sort of ensure that everything was. was kosher. And um. Honorton got, you know, very, you know, positive results uh in these. I think I. think they were telepathy experiments uh. if I'm not mistaken. Or maybe they were remote viewing, I'm. not sure. But anyway, Daryl Bem realized, you know, well, there's something to this. Um you know, he's getting results and.

uh and so anyway, in the in the first. decade of this century, uh he. you know, he already had a very. successful career as a uh. young personality in various various. topics. You know, he was a very. um. very respected. psychologist. Uh but anyway, he did this. large series of experiments. in which he reversed cause and effect in. basic psychology paradigms.

Um. uh one of them being like priming. Like. you're you're you know, a typical. priming experiment, you'd be. subliminally. shown some picture or whatever and then. see how it affects your behavior. afterwards. Right. Well, he would do an. experiment in which people perform on. some test and then are shown sub. something subliminal afterwards, okay? Uh so this kind of like reversal of. cause and effect. Anyway, he got. significant results in like eight of. nine experiments that he did. Can we.

explain the the curtain test? Photos? >> like those This is the most famous one. He. So he had um these were very large. experiments with large groups of. undergraduates. Um but he had. undergraduates sit at a computer and. choose. which of two curtains on a screen had a. picture behind it, okay? Now, I'll add, there wasn't. actually already a picture behind these. curtains. It was gener- It was generated.

randomly after the mouse click. So, okay. Anyway, so they make a mouse click and. then. it shows if they're right or wrong. And. they did they performed at chance, 50%. correct. as you would expect. 50% was there. >> When when. the picture to be revealed was boring, okay? >> Right. Like a beach scene or something. like that. But when the picture to be revealed was. erotic,

>> [laughter]. >> Yeah. Uh Emotional. >> Adults engaged in consensual sexual. acts. [laughter]. Porn. Yeah. Um. they they did better than chance. I. think 70%? Something like that? No, it. wasn't that high. I mean, the the the. you know, the effect size is still small. in these experiments. Um. but. but statistically, because he had so. many. participants and so many trials, it. reached statistical significance.

Okay. Uh and then there's another series. of experiments that sort of reversed. the typical order of a memory. experiment. So, uh so at a typical. memory task, you might. like be shown a word list. and then you engage in some seemingly. unrelated task that reminds you of. certain words on that list. And then you. take a test on the word list and you're. you'll be expected to perform better on. the words that were you were reminded. of, okay? >> Sure. Well, in his version, he showed had had.

kids look at a word list, then he tested them on the list. And then after the test, he had them. engage in a task which subliminally. reminded them of certain words on the. list. And guess what? They did better on. the words that they were. subsequently reminded of. Just let that. land for a second. >> Just let that let that land. They were reminded of certain words. later and those happened to be the words. they did better on from the list. >> Yes. Retroactive facilitation of recall. Mm.

Is what he called this. Um just to be fair to the skeptics, 2023, there was a replication issue, right, with Bem's research? Okay, there's a there are a lot of controversy. about this. The immediately the skeptics. jumped on this in. uh this this came out in 2011. Right. Immediately skeptics were enraged. I. mean, my colleagues at one of the. psychology organizations were enraged. Um. uh. Anyway, and then skeptics said, "No,

this can't be replicated and here we. tried to replicate it and we couldn't.". Uh but. mm. uh a lot of teams around the world did. replicate it. successfully. Uh and yeah, it does don't get on. Wikipedia because you'll you will see a. completely biased. uh. version of this. But. I think something like 80. independent 83 independent replications,

I think something like that. Um. so. yeah, fascinating fascinating. evidence for something like. precognition. What he would call it. pre-sentiment, feeling the future. And. that's what he called the art of the the. um. what what he called it in his original. article on this. So for the skeptics of. Bem's work, I think we have um in the. late '80s, physicist Aronov's split. laser. test is a hold my beer. Right, that story? Well, yeah, this.

wasn't Aronov. This was um. oh, I'm. Howell and Dickson, I believe. Um this. is also at Cornell, I think. Um. where. they uh. they took a laser beam. They. put it through a beam splitter to create. two identical beams. Essentially, they. don't That's not the the terms they use. in physics are different, but this. they're essentially creating an. experiment group and a control group. like you'd have in a psychology. experiment. Um and.

they did what was called a weak. measurement on both of these beams, uh. which is. measuring the amplitude of the beam. without interfering too much with the. with the beam. And this is a challenge. that we can talk about with these kinds. of experiments. Every time you you you. you measure something, you're. interfering with it in some way. Right, that's the collapse of the. >> Yeah, and the challenge is to try and. find ways of measuring things that don't. interfere too much so that you can tell. if a subsequent interaction is having a.

retro effect. Well, anyway, they they. split the beams, weakly measured both of the beams, and then did a strong measurement on one. of the two beams. And lo and behold, the. beam that got the strong later. measurement was amplified like 10 times. compared to the pre- previously compared. to the other. beam. Uh which suggests retrocausation. Now, you'll get contro- controversies and. physicists will debate the signifi- you.

know, what this means and so on. But uh. that seems to be evidence for. retrocausation. But John Wheeler's. delayed choice certainly That's would be. another example. Um. yeah, there's there's uh. the so so this is an active area of of. of research and multiple experiments. have been conducted like like that uh. that I just described. Um which seem to. so show retrocausation. Then you also. have the field of quantum computing, which is showing that you can have uh.

indeterminate. temporal ordering. of of computations [snorts]. in a quantum computer circuit. And I'm, you know, I admit I am not a physicist, I'm not a computing researcher, so you. know, this is all above my pay grade. But there's so many so many articles. have come out in the last several years. uh. uh showing that you can. invert causal order in a quantum. computing circuit. Yeah, in Cambridge, they're they're solving problems from.

with information from the future. >> Yeah. Yeah. Um can we explain just a little. bit about the delayed choice? What's. happening there? How it connects to. time? The photons going back to the. source, changing their state, that sort. of thing? Just to remind folks. Yeah, so. uh. >> [sighs]. [snorts]. >> de- Okay, so there's. um let me take the example of this. >> Or if you have a different favorite. Well, the like one of the experiments. that that I think. excited John Wheeler. I say his idea was.

that you could. um. take li- light from a distant quasar, say. And. choose to measure it a certain way. uh and it would. uh it would. show that how your choice of how to. measure it had influenced the light from. that distant quasar. Well, uh. a. uh. blanking on his [clears throat] name, Ali, I think, uh an astrophysicist,

um. I forget which university, but he he. heard Wheeler speak. and had an idea for actually testing. this using mirrors placed on the moon by. the Apollo. astronauts. Uh because they placed. mirrors on the moon to bounce laser. light back to sort of measure the very. minute like changes in distance between. Earth and Moon in different phases of. its orbit. Um well, they used, you know, they shot a laser at at the moon and.

that takes like what, I think a second. for light to get to the moon and back. So that's enough time to change the. parameters of an experiment. Unless. you're Nixon on the phone, then it's. instant. >> [laughter]. >> Right. Yeah. >> [gasps]. >> Um. and. uh and it showed indeed that you can. like you can change how you're going to. measure light and the light somehow. seems to know. >> It seems to know. Seems to know how it's. being measured. Yeah. Um well, you know, seeming to know. something that you shouldn't be able to. know, that, you know, that seems like.

telepathy, you know? but another way of. looking at telepathy is that it's really. precognition. That the that the that the. light. was influenced by that subsequent. measurement. And. and that information essentially from. the future traveled back in time along. the worldline of that photon. Right. It. fulfilled its destiny. >> It fulfilled its destiny, yeah. So. So, yeah, there's all kinds of reasons.

to think that yes, retrocausation. is a real thing at the at the smallest. scales in nature. Now, you know, that. that quantum. realm where you're talking about. individual particles, you know, behaving in seemingly. impossible ways. But, there are certain circumstances. where you can scale up the that quantum. magic. And that's when the topic of. entanglement comes in. When you entangle. particles together, you can create a. larger and larger object that.

enters the realm of. objects that we're used to interacting. with. And you can demonstrate that. quantum magic at a large scale. That. could be the strong force measurement, right? Just this entanglement of the. equipment. Or a quantum computer. A. quantum computer is a bunch of particles. that are entangled together to create an. essentially an object that performs. computations. And. And in those settings you can again, we.

talked about quantum computers reversing. cause and effect. Sure. You can have a. a material thing that is responding to. its future. Yes. Okay? And okay, then set aside. those those ideas and enter the realm of. biology where more and more. people are thinking that. the brain could be a quantum computer or. have quantum computing properties. And if that's the case, you know, add.

add all these add all these up and you. get the idea that the brain could be a. a four-dimensional information processor. that is pre-sponding to its future as. well as responding to its past. So on. the show I've I've covered quantum. biology with the. with the cryptochromes in the bird's. eye, which has been proven that they're. entangling with the magnetic field. Quantum processes in plants where. they're finding the Photosynthesis is a. quantum process. Yeah, they're checking. all the paths simultaneously. It's.

superposition in real time on leaves. So, clearly a quan- the quantum state. can be held in a wet. hot place. Right. Right. And that's. always been the the point of skepticism. Well, you can't have. entanglement occurring in a warm, wet. environment like the brain. But, it's increasingly being shown that. that actually you can and that living. that life is a quantum. is scaling up these quantum.

effects. I want to ask you about. microtubules in a second, but before we. move to that, what did Niels Bohr how. did he address. retrocausality? I know he didn't like. any of this. No, he did not. And he. Yeah, Niels Bohr is a. really important figure in. in the sort of I'd say century-long. denial or refusal. to look at retrocausation because ever.

since the 1920s. there has been this idea that. that retrocausation could explain a lot. of this spooky quantum stuff. But, the idea just keeps getting shoved. aside. partly because of Niels Bohr's. personality. I mean, he was just a very. forceful personality and he. he sort of got the whole field of. physics to just basically agree. to not interpret. what was going on. at a quantum level and just say it's.

random. And just accept that the world is random. fundamental level. And. and that's the answer and you just have. to wrap your head around that. Well, a lot of people have not wanted to. wrap their head around it. They have not. been satisfied with that answer. Einstein famously said, "God does not. play dice.". Uh That's right. >> And. but Niels Bohr basically dominated the. field.

until really the last couple of decades. when what's called the Copenhagen. interpretation and he was from Denmark, so it's called the Copenhagen. interpretation when it's kind of broken. down. And and now you have these this kind of. flurry of rival theories going on in the. field. So, you've got. Besides the Copenhagen interpretation, you have, you know, many worlds theory. that we talked about. You've got. uh. Bohm's pilot wave theory. You've got.

multiple rival theories, but. retrocausation or some version of. retrocausation and not all physicists. call it retrocausation. The problem is. they use different terms sometimes to. mean the same thing. >> Like what? What do we look at out Well, they'll tell you that to be really. precise, you can't talk in terms of. causation anymore. And you need to talk in terms of. constraints. And like they'll they'll. use different language because they. don't want to give this impression that. somehow energy is traveling from the.

future to the past and stuff like that. Um. To be. there's a there's a team that wrote a. book relatively recently called Beyond. the Dynamical Universe, which is basically making this same. argument that I'm talking about, but. they don't use the term retrocausation. and they and they take pains to. distinguish themselves from from other. physicists who use the term. retrocausation, but they're basically. talking about the same thing, which is. that that something happening in the.

future is constraining what's happening. now and thus that's a kind of. information traveling backward in time. You know, for us us ordinary humans who. need need to be able to grasp this. somehow, we need we need these clumsy. expressions like influence or. information traveling backward in time. We need to be able to put it that way so. that we can wrap our heads around it. But, that's, you know, a physicist will. have a more precise. way of talking about it. But, the basic. idea is that what happens in the future. influences what's happening now and.

what's happening now influenced what. happened in the past. It's so elegant. I. don't know why there's such resistance. to it. It's so elegant. >> Well, it takes away free will. Or it seems to. It it does. That's. that's something kind of stressful about. your theories is determinism and free. will. So, if. everything that's going to happen is. going to happen regardless because we're. on this timeline, then why does anything. matter? Well, right. That's that's where. people's heads go. Right. But, the more.

you sit with it, you get to another place. That's. >> [laughter]. >> that I think. That's a devil's advocate because I'm on. board. Yeah. That's that's what hangs people up. That's people's hang-up. It is a literal. hang-up. People get hung up on this on. this question of free will and they. think, "Oh, well, then. if it's going to happen anyway, what's the point?" But, you know, just. think about that for a second. Um. you can't know. the future. That's the thing. This is.

the This is the what I call the. precognition paradox. You cannot know. the future. Right. You cannot know the future. And you. don't know how any. you know, how the future is going to. unfold based on your actions. And just. laying in bed in the morning and not. getting up and putting on your pants and. going to work, you know, that's that's. an action just as much as as getting up. and putting on your pants and going to. work. That's true. So, it's like it. doesn't make any you know, you got to do something.

When So, I'm a Zen guy. All right? Really? Yes. And and when you. sit with this, when you sit with the. block universe as a koan, as a kind of, you know, koan, you reach a point where you go, "Holy That's it's beautiful." And. it's like it's liberating. It's liberating to get rid of the. baggage of free will determinate like. who cares? Oh. It's just It's.

just Easy for you to say. Well, you. know, but it's honestly, this is a point. you can get to when you treat this as a. koan, as a as a. you know, as a riddle. to be solved and don't just like turn. away from it. But, that's unfortunately. what's what generations of physicists. have done. They've turned away from it. because this this trespasses on some. philosophical idea that's really. important for us as Westerners. True. Um and. and it's distorted their interpretation.

of the science, which is that's not. scientific either. You know, we talked. about ways people ways in which. scientists don't behave scientifically. Well, generations of physicists have avoided. a very obvious and elegant conclusion. or a very obvious and elegant hypothesis. about nature. simply because it is philosophically. and culturally kind of uncomfortable.

And that's not behaving scientifically. either. No, it's not. Fortunately, they all haven't. So, eventually the evidence is just going to. stack up. Yeah, but it's the you know, it is. acquiring that evidence is tough because. of this because of this problem of. distinguishing between, you know, when. you when you measure something, you're. interfering with it. So, how is your. measurement, you know, is it is it. simply changing. the future or is it changing it's it's. it is very hard to test this. experimentally and for exactly the same. reasons why it is hard to prove that my.

dream about two buildings with. corrugated facades that were mosques on. the morning before 9/11 wasn't a. coincidence. I mean, it's you know. >> You can't prove that. >> always be the the counter. The. uncertainty principle. So that. uncertainty principle is right there at. the heart of the topic of precognition. So before we talk about Penrose and. Hameroff, which everybody listening. knows, let me pull another story out of you. because I I love the bootstrap paradox. Yeah. Did you I you've addressed this I.

think in your work. Can you explain what. that is and Yeah, so the my the. bootstrap paradox is my favorite. I. mean, it's it's another way of putting a. time loop basically. Um. uh it's. uh the idea so say you have a. um. uh here here's an example that David. Deutsch. uh the physicist and quantum computing. pioneer uses in in a paper that he wrote. in the 1990s. He says, "Okay, you have a. uh.

uh a Nobel Prize winning. physicist. I'm sorry, Nobel Prize winning math-. mathematician. Uh and he has access to a time machine. And he goes back in time and finds. himself his younger self, you know, studying in the library and. gives him the proof. that he later won the Nobel Prize for. solving. Um. and so the the he basically just gave it. to himself in the future and there's. nowhere in that causal loop where.

anybody actually did the work. >> Right. of solving that math problem. Okay? Well, that's what makes steam. shoots out shoot out people's ears, you. know, it's like It's bothered me since. Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home. >> Exactly. >> [laughter]. >> Right? Exactly. How do we know you. didn't invent the thing? >> Exactly. It's It's It's there at the at. the heart of any time loop is this. bootstrap paradox. But again, [clears throat] it's we're. not It's not really a paradox. Bootstrap. paradox is a misnomer. It's a tautology.

It's not a paradox. Uh in fact, I think that that everything. is bootstrapping. Wow, I hadn't considered It It goes all. the way down. That that it in a time travel universe, any universe that at allows time travel. at all, ultimately everything is bootstrapped. Everything's a bootstrap. >> it has to be. And this is And this is. why I love the topic. This is why I. wrote my last book um Where was it. before the dream? Because it.

it is an answer to that question of of, you know, you know, where does a new idea come. from? Well, it's literally like that proof. that is given to the younger self by the. older self and it doesn't come from any. It literally comes from nowhere in the. sense that there is nowhere in the. history of an idea where somebody like. actually did the work of solving a. problem. It just literally is given to. your younger self by your older self and. that's. >> Plagiarism of the future. Plagiarism of.

the future. So this is this is this is. the time loop at the heart of. creativity, I think. And it's And it's. literally creation ex nihilo. So it's literally we're gods. Okay? Creators are gods because they're. creating from literally nothing. There. is literally nowhere in the history of. an idea that some that that some little. imp is putting it hammering it together. or putting it together. Nowhere that. you're that your brain is piecing. together. things and creating a new thing. It's.

It's receiving it as a gift from its. future self. You are the muse of. yourself. >> I When I when I'm having good ideas now, I find myself thanking my future self. Like I appreciate that's that's great. That's a good idea. >> Yeah. Yeah. Is that driving some of your work? Yeah, totally. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, it's it's um I I think it's. an inspiring way of thinking about about. about art and creativity, but about you. know, just creative solutions in. general. I you know, I think that's I.

think that's what's happening. It's easy. to show It's easier to show with art. because um because, you know, you have. an artwork that then is something like a. dream journal that you can then compare. to a later event or whatever in a. person's life. It's It's a little harder. with things like inventions and. scientific. theories and stuff like that. Uh they. just are not as amenable to that kind of. confirmation uh uh. process and that kind of comparing with. a person's biography. But uh I think.

that that's what innovation. really is is bootstrapping. What do you. think's happening with flow state and. sort of unconscious behavior? Yeah, that's a a flow state A flow state. is when you are cooking. uh in terms of that that bootstrapping. That's your future self just kind of. giving. >> into the Yes, flowing unimpeded. Yeah, I. mean, anyone who. And it's Yeah, and it goes beyond. creativity. Like any anyone who's who's. uh. uh doing some skilled activity, a.

martial artist or a. you know, a jet fighter pilot or a brain. surgeon, you know, they're in a zone. Yes. >> They are not thinking about their free. will. This is another reason I tell. people stop worrying about free will. You know, your best self. always comes out when you're not. thinking deliberately about your will. >> Every time. >> Exerting your will. Your best self is. that that in the zone when you are a. machine. You're part of a machine and. you're part of what I think of as a sort. of four-dimensional machine that's.

that's like, you know, cycling through. time as well as space. Um it's uh you know, that's what you. know, the Zen you know, it's a Zen. thing, you know, we the Zen Zen masters. are all about finding that state where. you are not. freely willed. You know, you are you are. doing what must be done. And. >> [snorts]. >> It It This I'm going to go off script a. little bit because something just. occurred to me as you're saying this is. um. as a martial artist, as a performer and.

sitting here in this room, when things. are moving well, it's it's very. automatic, but I will find myself with a. second dialogue almost observing. Mhm. It's happened here a couple of times. today where where I'm just sort of. observing, "Oh, that was a great. question. Oh, this is really. interesting. It's going well." That sort. of thing. Or if you're performing, Yeah. you're doing stand-up, you're like, "Oh, the audience is kind of rough off. tonight. Let's Let's try this material.". What What do you think is going on in. the mind when you've got these split. monologues? Uh yeah, that's a great question. You. know, I I come back to.

um. uh it's an idea. that I talk about in in time loops a bit. called Libet's Golem. Uh if Ben- Benjamin Libet was uh a. neuroscience researcher. >> Terrifying Terrifying research. >> Terrifying research about how, you know, we're out of sync with with reality. >> We may have to describe his experiments. But yeah, well, that that would be fine, but the thing is the the the upshot I. think of his research is that we are. actually we are actually pulling our.

meat puppet's strings from the future. And that those moments that you're. describing, you know, like you know, like I'm a martial artist, too, you. know, you have those moments where you. kind of mentally replay something really. great that you just did. >> what if that's your freely willed self. pulling your meat puppet's strings in. the past? You know, what if that's where. your free will is being exerted is on. your past behavior? Um that's, you know, again, how do we prove that? I don't. know. But But But it is one way of. interpreting it exists. We whether we.

want to prove it or not, it happens to. people in flow state. Even when you're. sinking a bunch of baskets, >> Yeah. you're on something's going on. Yeah. Yeah. Totally. And you talk to. psychics. Remote viewers go into that. state, too, when they're, you know, when. they're cooking. What do you think. remote viewers are they Are they. remembering the future as remote. viewers? >> a big debate. It's a big debate the. field. I mean, I I think that's a. hypothesis that needs to be tested and. no one's testing it. Um. uh Well, I saw you criticize Pat Price. Well, I'm a huge Pat Price fan and when.

you kind of. described what Pat was doing, it made a. lot of sense to me because he was cuz. remote viewers are wrong more than. they're right. But when they're right, they're definitely right. Yeah. So. they're just remembering they were. right. That's That's the hypothesis that. needs to be falsified before we assume. that remote viewing is actually, you know, sending your consciousness. across space to some other location or. to some target. Uh it needs to be. falsified that you're not previewing.

or pre-remember or pre-membering the. feedback you're going to get. afterwards. True. And And this is, you know, some very small experiments. have been done to try and test this, but. not not on any scale and I I I always. tell remote viewers, you've got I'm. unfortunately I'm not a an experimental, you know, parapsychologist. I don't know. I'm not I don't have the setup to to to. study this myself, but I think someone. who has the the the means should set up.

experiments where they you you And. unfortunately, these are kinds of. experiments are the kinds that would be. done at any psychology laboratory where. you have to deceive your subjects and I. think that's why it does these. experiments don't happen because the. subjects. >> They're happening. We're just, you know, Stargate never ended, I don't think. Right, but are they But are these. experiments that would falsify the. precognition hypothesis? They're. probably not probably not focused on it. I don't know. Did you remote view your. wife's shoes? I did not remote view my wife's shoes. I.

precognized. being on the floor hunting for an Advil. that had dropped among my wife's shoes, yeah. So remote viewing. But it's I'm saying it's an open. question and I I put it out there. because I no one else is voicing it and. I think it's really something that that. that the field. needs to address. Well, that's why I. asked you this in the first place cuz. when I read your work I put it down and. and I just like, oh I hadn't. considered. That's why I ask you these I.

ask you questions. Maybe it's not even. your field, but you're here. So, might as well pick the brain. Yeah, but it's you know, remote viewers will. get I understandably touchy about it. because I mean it's it's important. You know, it it feels it's validating of. a certain belief system that about. consciousness and so on that it leaves. the body and so on and and and I get it. I I you know, I people don't want cold. water thrown on that and I'm I'm just. I'm saying look look this is you if.

you're going to. really believe that you need to test it. You know, that that's the point of being. a materialist scientist which is you. know, really testing rigorously. and taking the most reductive. a you know, version of of a story and. seeing if that reductive version can. explain the results and maybe it can't. You know, I'm I'm open that maybe maybe. there is you know, more remote viewing. than precognition. I I certainly talk to.

people who are who are very convinced. that that's the case. Um but it's it. needs to be done in the context of of. studies that are published where you can. look at the evidence. And hard to get. that published. >> to yeah, it is. Probably not an accident. that Jacques Vallée was hanging around. SRI in the '70s, you know, probably not. an accident. >> Probably not an accident. Um and he and. he was like the first one of the first. people to raise this possibility by the. way. I mean it's in his journals like.

he's you know, he had lunch this is 1978. I think with the SRI guys and said like, how do you guys know this isn't. precognition? You know, you're treating. this all like this is clairvoyance and. this could be all precognition and he. was he was very early on that kind of. bandwagon that this may be precognition. Has Vallée addressed the microtubules. and and Hammeroff's work yet? Not that I'm aware of. Where do you. stand on on that quantum process in the. brain? >> I'm very much in favor of Hammeroff's. work. The anesthesiologist side.

>> Yeah, like a microtubule. I think. microtubules could be the answer. I. don't I am not personally that. interested in the question of. consciousness. You're not? >> No, I think it's a red herring. I think I think uh. if something's going to come out of this. search for consciousness, uh it's going to be it's it's. going to be a sort of serendipitous. discovery of the mechanisms underlying. precognition and I think that's where. that's where the significance of. microtubules is. Um. so, micro so we were talking about. memories being consolidated. Okay. Um.

so, guess what it is in neurons that. reshape the synapses every night when. you're dreaming and creating new. memories. Microtubules. Yes. >> Microtubules. So, [snorts]. if these microtubules are the little. quantum computers. uh. that are pre-sponding to their own. future states. It makes perfect sense. You know, it. really creates a perfect little. hypothesis for how precognition works.

Um so, I think you know, I think there. and microtubules aren't the only. structures in cells that seem to have. quantum computing properties, but that. that's that's what I think is the. significance of of microtubules. I'm not I'm not convinced by. any of the explanations for. consciousness and I'm not convinced by. Hammeroff and Penrose's. uh theory that it's. um Are you not interested in it? I'm not really. I don't I don't think I. I think.

consciousness. is. people are being premature in thinking. that we can get to the part of what. consciousness is because there are there. are really good arguments to be made. that consciousness is an illusion. You'll never get a satisfactory answer. >> No, you're never going to get No, yeah. and then that's the other thing. No. physical explanation of consciousness is. ever going to satisfy anybody. You know, and I've read a lot a lot of. them. I I find a lot of different. physicalist interpretations of. consciousness interesting, you know,

they they this is illuminating, but this. is not not the and this is not the. ultimate answer. Likewise, I find you. know, non-physicalist interpretation of. consciousness interesting, but they're. none none of them are satisfying. None. of the none of the stories about. consciousness are satisfying and I think. that that suggests that consciousness is. not a problem that can be solved uh. right now or using the wrong terms. Where are you on the soul then and life. after death and. it our death is just waiting for us, right? We're being pulled toward it.

Well, we're being pulled towards our. survival. Oh, okay. >> being pulled towards survival. I think. that's what how time precognition that's. how time loops work in the life of an. organism. We're being drawn generally. towards our survival. I I watched you. describe anxiety this way now that you. mention it. Yeah, I think anxiety could be a signal. That signal. >> signal of our of our future withstanding. of challenges and threats. Um that that. if.

if precognition. is drawing us towards an existing future. then it can't be drawing us towards a. fan of possible futures. So, it's drawing us towards a single. future in which we are experiencing our. survival of something. You're not going. to experience your survival if there. hasn't been a challenge to your. survival. If there hasn't been a threat. there. So, we're not we're not going to. precognize a future that's all roses and. and and all good things and and nothing.

bad ever happening. Uh nor are we generally going to. precognize uh hitting the the brick wall. of of death. We're going to precognize. close calls and guess what? That's what. people often have precognitive dreams. about. Close calls. Uh things. you know, situations in which we say, wow, that sucked, but it could have been. worse. That's that that is the basic thought. I think at the heart of most.

precognitive dreams is, but I survived. And that and we could be talking about. something as as trivial as the sink. backing up or something like yeah, it's. just you know, real really really minor. threats and upheavals, but uh but you. know, little things challenges that. happen or things that challenge our. security in one way or another our peace. of mind, things that challenge our peace. of mind. Um but that but I'm still. standing. Well, that when people say, why do we.

want to watch a train wreck? That's why. >> That's why. That's exactly that's. exactly it. Why were we so glued to CNN. on the morning of 9/11? Cuz it wasn't. us. Cuz it wasn't us. Mm. >> Right. Yeah. Yeah, the there's that. great supposedly an Aristotle quote. I. don't know if it actually appears in. Aristotle, but luck is when the guy next. to you gets hit with an arrow. And that's a very interesting thought. because it's not luck is when nobody. gets hit with an arrow. Right.

Right. >> It's when the guy next to us And the. thing but the thing is it's not because. we're bad people and we wish harm on. other people. It's not that that would. be kind of Freud's kind of dark view of. human nature. The the point is it's pure semiotics. You can't have a signal X signal without. that contrast of. signal. So, you can't have the I. survived. You can't have I survived. without something representing. the possibility of not surviving and. that's I think accounts for people's. fascination with disasters and death.

It's not that we're bad people or we're. we're we're excited by that. It's that. it's that there on some basic reptilian, you know, we started about talking about. reptiles. On some basic reptile level. uh. we like we like that message, but I. survived. Yeah. >> You look at sunflowers sometimes and. you're like, I I get you. I get you. What happens after we die? What is Where. is our consciousness? That's out of my. That's out of my lane. I don't know. You.

don't have any feelings? We're we're allowed to speculate. I don't Okay, so If you're not sure, give them give them something. >> I would I would. I would say well, I think it's death is. probably the end, but thing is I don't. think it's possible to really believe. that. I don't think it's possible. I think we. all. deep down. believe in. Whether we say it or not. >> Whether we say it or not, we all believe. in God and we all believe in the.

afterlife. Agreed. And we cannot help it. but believe that. So, I can sit here and. intellectually say why. I don't you know, I haven't seen it. evidence that convinces me otherwise, but the deep down, of course I believe. Sure. You know, but it doesn't I haven't. [snorts] I I I genuinely have not seen. uh. convincing evidence that we precognize. things that we. don't that we don't survive to learn.

about. But but that it is that is an. interesting question. There are there. are a tiny handful of of precognition. cases that seem. to be about things that happened after a. person's death. A tiny handful. Um. uh Edgar Allan Poe. his story. uh. something about Gordon Pym. I forget the. story, but like he has a has a story. about these these uh four people in a in.

a lifeboat who cannibal who three people. who cannibalized the fourth person in. the lifeboat and has the names and then. after his death, decades after his. death, there was a real case with. exactly those exact names and they. cannibalized some of the people in the. lifeboat. >> That was in my synchronicity episode, I. got it wrong. It's a time loop. >> Yeah. Well, you know, that would that. would not fit my model. It wouldn't? Right. But Why not? Because it was after his death. >> Oh, right. He couldn't re- pre-remember. it. >> On the other hand.

coincidences do happen. They do. They. are part of the of the universe. And by. the law by that argument of the law of. large numbers, which is what. debunkers you throw it at this problem. all the time. They're wrong to do that, but. nevertheless, it is real that. coincidences happen. And and it's in. those names were common. at the time. And cannibalism at sea was actually.

surprisingly common. Uh. you know, so. you can make the argument that it was. that was pure coincidence. But you know, that's. that that just. validates my. >> [laughter]. >> my favorite theory. You know. How do you know what to throw. away when you're going through the. stories? Like, "Ah, that's probably not. it." Well, you know, I you've got to. This is the problem. Nobody's objective. completely. And and this is why science. is so important because science is a. collective enterprise of throwing away.

people's pet theories and individual. biases and let's see what the evidence. really shows. So, you know, you've got. to. have that attitude. That's you know, that's skepticism. And um. Uh I I will say I've been led to a. theory of precognition. based on. evidence. you know, from a from a place of not at. all believing. you know. in anything like precognition. Uh.

you know, based on the evidence of my. own experience correlated with other. people's experience correlated with. you know, scientific findings correlated. with the plausibility of a physics that. that explains it. You know, putting a. lot of pieces together. But will I be. objective in tossing out a certain piece. of of evidence that that doesn't fit my. theory? I mean, the thing is I don't. know of of of. any other cases like that Gordon Pym. one. Right. There aren't a lot. You tell. yourself you would be objective, but.

it'd make a great story. Maybe we'll. keep it in. What was that spark for. someone who's trained as an cultural. anthropologist working in science? What was that What was that spark that. made you go time loop? That cuz it's it. seems so far. out of your field. Um. Was it a culmination? >> a culmination of. yeah. >> Yeah. Reading through the data. >> it's yeah, and it's like um. the um.

you know, the different pieces of the. argument have all been made by other. people. You know, I'm just I'm just. assembling what what you know, I'll I'll. name Igor Novikov who's. uh. he is a Russian physicist. who. he was the one that really. debunked. for physics, he debunked the grandfather. paradox idea that that. uh you know, that you could have.

paradoxes caused by time travel. I mean, he's the one who really. you know, said, "No, you're you're. thinking about this wrong." Anytime you. go back in time and have an effect in. time, that's part of the backstory of. the present and that including your. travel your journey through time. So, he. would basically was articulating. something like uh a time loop or. bootstrap. paradox. In fact, his term for bootstrap. bootstrapping. uh is jinn. Jinn, you know, they they. they're the mythological creatures in. Islamic mythology that just appear out.

of nothing. He called he called them jinn. And this. was in the context of writing about. wormholes and how you might have. uh. an effect arising from. traveling through a wormhole that where. something arises literally from nothing. Uh so, this was you know, Igor Novikov. was writing about this in the in the. '90s. Um. uh. you know, there So, these all these. ideas have been floated before. So, arriving from nothing reminds me.

something else you talked about. This is. how we know we're kind of toward the end. of this because now I'm now I'm off. script. I'm just asking my questions. Um orbs appearing from nowhere, orbs. splitting apart. Yes. That's what I talk. about in Becoming Time Traveler. So, what are we seeing there? I don't know, but the the. that behavior of objects appearing from. nothing and splitting into two or. merging and disappearing. which you get in some reports of.

UFOs You do? Uh that is consistent with. a single object traveling reversing its. course in time. How does that work? Well, an object [clears throat] Say you have. Say you have a time ship. Let's say you. have a orb time ship. You're sitting in. your orb and you pull a lever to. reverse your temporal direction and. travel back in time. What that's going to look like to you on. the inside, it's going to you're going. to pull that lever and suddenly the. external world, this is presuming you.

could see outside your Yeah, there are a. lot of problems with this. But. you know, you'll you're going to look. like when you pull that lever, suddenly. everything outside your ship is going to. look like it's a film in reverse. Okay? It's ever everything is going to look. Like an H. G. Wells story? It's going to. It's going to look Well, H. G. Wells in. his story mainly went to the future. He. didn't really talk about. >> about how he watched things happening. Yeah, but but but in this case, if you. pull the lever, say you're going you're. you're in your. orb time ship and you're just you're.

in ordinary time and you pull the lever. to go into reverse. You throw it into. reverse, okay? Suddenly everything. outside your ship is going to look like. it's it's in reverse and you're going to. see history happening backwards, okay? Like a film in on rewind, okay? >> Yeah. From an outside perspective, the outside. observer. what they're going to see is two time. ships, identical time ships converging. and disappearing. Yes. That's what it's going to look like to. an outside observer. And likewise, say you.

um. you know, you you're enjoying the sort. of the history rewinding for a while and. go, "Ah, let me I'm going to throw it. back into forward." You pull the lever. again. What that's going to look like. is two time ships. emerging from nothing and traveling. apart. So, an outside observer would see. like that. So, and and so that that. whole that S-shaped movement would look. like. um.

an object over here. two objects splitting over here and. these two objects merging and. disappearing and that other object. flying off. That's what it would look. like. I I worked this out. for myself. uh using flip books. Flip books? >> Yeah. I. >> [laughter]. >> Uh I wish I'd brought them, actually. They're uh um. uh. you know, I was like I was sort of. mentally going through like, "What would. this look like?" And so, my animation. skills aren't great. Although actually. on my I wound up doing little. stop-motion animations um on my website.

You can find them on my website for some. of the stuff I talk about in that book. Um but. uh. I worked this out in flip books using. little orbs in flip books and like what. it would look like. And it's like really. trippy to to you know, what that this. visual effect is. And it is consistent. with with some descriptions of. of of um of UFO behavior. And so, that's. that's where my why I support Mike. Masters, you know, or at least the the. plausibility of his hypothesis that that.

it's it's I I again, I'm less interested. in the anthropological part of it, but. in the the behavior of. of these objects. there is all kinds of reasons to think. that they are manipulating time. And. that's one of them that they could be. actually reversing their course in time. Uh they could be actually physically. traveling backward in time. What about. when we see multiple, more than two? >> You could have You could? a single. object that reverses its course multiple.

times in the time stream would look for. that duration of time like a swarm of. objects. We see that. We see that. We. see swarms. Yeah. Yeah, in fact, you. know, the example I I I use in the book. is um apparently. uh. Wernher von Braun. Now, he wasn't there to see it. He. wasn't at the Trinity test, but. apparently he wrote in his diary that. that. people at the Trinity test reported. seeing swarms of.

objects. A lot of tests that we've seen. this. Yeah. And uh well, like what if it. was a single object single. single guy in a time ship, you know, wanting to get multiple vantage points. on this single this this this event and. scrub it back and forth like you were. looking at a Scrubbing scrubbing a. timeline. >> Scrubbing a timeline back and forth. What it would look like to an outside. observer is a swarm of objects. And why. are they moving the same way cuz it's. the same ship? >> same ship. >> Yeah. Scrubbing a timeline. Yeah.

Okay, blew my mind again. Um. So, yeah, I uh. I I wish I'd brought those um flip books. cuz it's it. If you have them online, we'll we'll. throw them up. >> them online. I there's a a website. I. did I did little my daughter helped me. make little like stop-motion animations. of flying saucers merging and stuff like. that. So. What are we missing out of um Time. Traveler that we should cover? I mean, I think I could throw all my. stuff. I'll I'll talk to you for hours.

>> Just the you know, the the. Don't get hung up on grandfather. paradoxes. These like these hang-ups. that people have about about time and. time travel. Um they're they're totally false. They're they're they're myths. And the. thing is they're they're falsehoods that. have been. uh. promoted by some of the greatest minds. of our time like Stephen Hawking thought. that time travel was impossible because. it would lead to paradoxes. But the. whole first chapter of my book is why.

that's a complete nothing burger. Uh the. the. there's. time travel does not lead to paradox. If. you get on board with that and block. universe. >> Mhm. and delayed choice, everything just. seems to make sense now. Everything just. seems to fall right elegantly, perfectly. Yeah, everyone needs to read your read. your books for sure. Uh what else did we miss, Eric? I don't know. We covered a lot. Where.

should they go? Where do you want them. to go? Um the night shirt? Um If you're into sci-fi, the night. shirt. Yeah, I don't really contribute I mean I. I I don't have time to blog anymore. I'm. on I lately I've been putting some. things on my Substack. It's also the. night shirt. Um and um. uh they can find my books on my website. ericwergo.com and you know, they're all. on Amazon. And nobody should follow you. on Twitter, right? Let's not. Oh, I'm I'm on Twitter. I don't really I. don't really post that much on Twitter.

anymore. I had a great following a few. years ago and then they then when. Twitter changed, I lost I lost, you. know, >> Yeah, I had I was I was and I was in had. good engagement. I had a good audience. on Twitter and then and then half the. people left Twitter and then half the. people stopped posting and it became. kind of a hell. uh hell site, but uh I'm still there. Okay. And they can interact with me. there. They can DM me or whatever. Well, I definitely want to check out your. Substack. I didn't know you were doing. that. The night shirt was.

mostly the way I prepared for this this. conversation, but talk about a rabbit. hole. So fascinating. That stuff is. evergreen by the way. Doesn't matter. that you haven't posted in a while. >> Well, actually I've started on my. Substack I've been reposting a few of. the older articles that I really liked. on the night shirt that you know, no one. sees anymore. I I reposted those on on. the Substack. I'd love to see you go. back to those old ones with new. commentary, things that you've learned. through your writing. Well, that's what. I did. I re I sort of rewrote rewrote. those pieces and added to them and so. on.

But yeah. All right, Dr. Eric Wargo, a. huge influence on this channel and my. storytelling. Thank you so much. This is. great. This has been really fun. Really. fun. You're coming for every book. Cool. All right, thanks, Eric. Thanks. So here's what checks out about Eric's. work. His PhD is from Emory University. He [music] worked as an editor for. psychology organizations for years. The block universe theory is real. It. comes directly from Einstein's [music]. special relativity. Hermann Minkowski. formalized it 1907. Now that's the idea that the past, present, [music] and future all exist.

simultaneously and most physicists. accept this. It's not fringe science. Now let's talk about Daryl Bem's. experiments. [music] This is where. things get interesting. In 2011, Bem. published nine experiments showing. precognition effects. Students chose. [music] which curtain hid erotic images. before the computer even generated them. Memory tests where future studying. [music] improved past performance. The. results were statistically significant. And here's what most people don't know. Bem's work has [music] been replicated. A 2015 meta-analysis found 90.

independent experiments. Many showed the. same effects. The replication crisis you. hear about [music] is focusing on failed. attempts by skeptics, but successful. replications do exist. I just [music]. had to bring that up just. to keep us honest. Now the quantum. physics part, that's real, too. Wheeler's delayed choice experiments, I've talked about that a million times. >> [music]. >> The quantum eraser studies. These show. measurement choices can retroactively. affect past events. Quantum computing. researchers. >> [music]. >> now working on something called.

indefinite causal order. Computations. where cause and effect run backwards. I know. I know. And Eric's [music] personal. stories are compelling. His 26-year. precognitive dream, the cylindrical. resonance patterns, artists like Michael. Richards sculpting himself being pierced. by airplanes before dying in the Twin. Towers. David Mandel dreaming about the. towers collapsing exactly [music] 5. years before 9/11. These cases are. documented. And I keep coming back to Young's scarab. [music] story. The patient dreams of.

receiving a scarab beetle. The next day. Young hears tapping on his window, a. beetle. He catches it [music] and hands. it to her. Eric calls this a time loop, not. synchronicity. The dream [music] caused. her to tell Young, which caused him to. notice the beetle, which caused the. dream in the first place. >> [music]. >> It's a closed causal loop. This connects. to a lot of topics I've covered on the. channel. The episode about. synchronicities touched exactly on these. patterns. The time travel episodes from. Project [music] Pegasus to John Titor, even the CIA's Gateway Process research.

They're all exploring the same. fundamental question. Does consciousness. [music] transcend linear time? I don't know. Eric's work is thoughtful. Instead of rejecting materialism or. mainstream science, he's arguing for a. paradigm shift within it. The future. might not be fixed, >> [music]. >> but it might be influencing the present. in ways we don't understand. His books. are great. Time loops and [singing]. precognitive dream work and the long. self. You can find them on Amazon. [music] and check out his blog, which is. super interesting, especially if you're. into sci-fi. It's called the night. shirt. We'll link all this [music] stuff.

below. Eric brings serious academic credentials. to these questions and that matters in a. field full of speculation. Now thanks to. scientists like Eric, we might. eventually get some answers to what are. probably the most important questions. [music]. ever posed. I thought I had more, [music] but I. guess I guess not. Until next time, be. safe. Be. We're having fun, right? Be safe, be. kind, and know that you are appreciated. [music].

>> [music]. >> I played Bolivians in Area 51. A secret. code inside [music] the Bible said I. would. I love my UFOs and paranormal [music]. fun as well as music, so I'm singing it. like I should. >> [singing].

>> But then another conspiracy [music]. theory becomes the truth, my friends, and it never [music] ends. No, it never ends. >> [music]. >> I fear the cryptid [music]. and got stuck inside Mel's hole with. MKUltra. I fear an only two away. Did Stanley Kubrick [music] fake the.

moon landing alone on a film set or were. the shadow people. >> [music]. >> The Roswell alien gets bought the. smiling man, I'm told, >> [music]. >> and his name was Cold. And I can't believe. I'm dancing with [music] the. >> [music].

>> All I ever wanted was to just hear the. truth. >> [music]. >> So the world falls apart. through the. >> [music]. [music]. >> The mothman sightings and the solar. storm still [music] come to a god that's.

the secret city underground. Mysterious numbers stations, planet. [music] X supposed to, Project Stargate, and what the dark watchers found. >> [music]. >> We're in a simulation, don't you worry though. The black knight satellite told me. so. I can't believe [music].

>> [music]. >> All. I ever wanted [music] was to just hear. the truth. So the world falls. apart through the night. >> [music]. >> All I ever wanted was [music] to just. hear the truth. So the world falls.

apart through the. >> [music]. >> Giddy love. Giddy love to dance on the dance floor. >> [music]. >> because she is a camel. and camels love to dance. when the feeling is right on the. wasted time.

Giddy love to. >> [music]. >> Giddy love to. >> [music].