The Holographic Universe (Part Two)

También disponible en Español - www.universoholograficotallere...
The Holographic universe suggests that the physical world we believe to be real is in fact illusion. Energy fields are decoded by our brains into a 3D picture, to give the illusion of a physical world.
butterfliesfree.com/
www.holographicuniverseworksho...

[@robertcharpentier6852]

Decades ago I had a friend in Hawaii who was a theoretical physicist and he told me long before "The Universe is a Hologram" became widely accepted as the reality we live within here on earth and in our universe that it appeared to him and other physicists he knew from around the globe that we, as humans, may have an observational factor in whatever we see. In other words, he postulated that our reality may be what we see into this world. He gave an example that Jesus could have believed so deeply in an afterlife and heaven and hell that his "vision/observation" of the world he lived within became exactly as he envisioned it to be. This would be much the same way that some people, like Alexander the Great, who believed they are destined to do a specific thing more or less create the reality that they live within. It is almost as though reality can be controlled or created by a person's thoughts. Paranoid people live in a paranoid world. Those who see evil all around them and feel threatened by unseen sources often end up having something bad happen to them. Since I was a child I always believed I would be a novelist and now against all odds I have written 14 books. We may be able to directly affect what happens to us through our thoughts that then transform these intelligence waves all around us into pathways into our futures. Very interesting videos! StocktonRob

[@MetaversalSouljah]

I believe I live an easy life where I run into money and am athletic

[@hypermecha223]

Watching this stuff makes me think that maybe there are some other entities somewhere that are thinking, "uh oh...they're starting to figure it out..."

[@godzonly1]

lol

[@goldrise]

This all was revealed in the Bible, the Holographic Universe only explains it in detail but the bible already mentioned all this if you read it and pay attention, tells you about this life not being real, and the truth is what you don't see, the bible does mention you start living reality when you die and tells you about the other dimension, these videos just explains it more that's all I saw nothing here just proved to me the bible is more complete

[@lex.cordis]

I definitely thought the same thing.

[@larswalzberg8486]

there is just one conciousness in the end and you are part of it, atleast thats what diffrent peope experienced

[@1210CM]

Most probably not. Singular entities like, e.g. a person, an individual, are phenomenas that exist or are of any significance only in the manifest world, the world we live in. Therefore, there can be nobody out there beyond this reality who thinks, wishes, desires, . . . On the 'other side' it all is as it is, but most importantly it is beyond individuality, and yet, conscious, peaceful, eternal - no space, no time, . . . ..

[@Drstrangeclock]

It is exciting to think we are alive at a time where we are answering such fundamental questions.

[@troy3689]

Ok, where does the Bird / waveform 1st come from ? If we download the frequency from the field then project out, where is the bird waveform created or come from for us to receive it ? Thanks Troy

[@MrSpadeofAce]

how do I download 1 million dollars into my experience? :)

[@RyanMartinsrjmartins]

Simple > just put forth the thought of a Million dollars being in your reality is cause for its existence. Know that it already exists and awaits you. This puts forth the wave that will soon be shown. It just doesn't poof up into existence.. YET ;)

[@MrSpadeofAce]

cool thnx

[@sundehaan1994]

MrSpadeofAce

[@ModestConfidence]

....mmmmcount to three then buy a lottery ticket! ;^/

[@sectusempraa]

you must have the right links :D

[@DonWilsondigginTimeUSA]

I have watched part 1 and part 2, I have been researching paranormal phenomena for 20 or more years and this is exactly what I predicted as a means to explain it. Thank you!

[@dariayalov3374]

Thank you so much for compiling this beautiful presentation!! I'm watching it over and over again for a few days now.

[@MrCostiZz]

Amazing video …..The commentating and presentation is equally excellent. A definite bookmark.

[@Felhek]

Basically maybe we don't even have a body. we don't know what we really are. we could be just an object, tiny as a particle. moving around a nucleous. dreaming about the life we think we have. it is kinda scary and if you think too much about it, you could lose yourself. becareful.

[@tsdz2008]

It should be said that for those familiar with Buddhism, these may be relatively easy to understand.

[@clubadv]

Outstanding work StuOH my second time through this. Going to research some of the claims made to see if there is yet even more fresh insight into them. It has taken time to train my brain to "see" or comprehend the inescapable conclusions, and you videos help put my into the right mind. Are you open to insight you may have missed? I notice near the end of this video (part two) you deduce a different experience for everyone therefore a different reality, however I don't see it like that. Much like a multi-player game sure each player has their own experience, but drawing from the same reality. That is why when your friend comes over with an apple in hand, you both "see" the apple. Albeit from a different perspective, but the renderings are highly consistent with each other. I will confess that I view all this from the perspective of God as the source of intelligence and the source for what downloads (decisions) are made. Even Christians debate free-will vrs determinism when their own bible clearly shows both to be true. To me, all of this makes perfect sense with God in view. I will remain open to alternative prime reality but for now I cannot see anything to discredit a timeless, formless, all-knowing, all powerful, entity keeping this "hologram" functioning.

[@amitsunoko7270]

Hi do you have the rest of the parts to The Holographic Universe series?

[@nduhiumutitu2765]

somebody help please,do you choose what you want to download or is it pre determined

[@blatendcrude7570]

Thanks for showing almost complete fucking movies. As an example.......

[@TheCyrilkingblues]

The observer is the observed. :)

[@RayRay-ht7rr]

The thinker is the thought.😊

[@RayRay-ht7rr]

***** Lol on the contrary. The thought makes the thinker.

[@juntjoonunya9216]

Life is what you make of it

[@theforestero]

;Does light reflect off of the Solar System planets,creating Hologram Reflection?The sund does produce light,and light DOES reflect off of the MOON (hence the mmoon light,at night)BUt..what about Sunlight hitting Jupiter,and reflecting back to other planets..?Another question..Can Sun light from our Sun reflect off of other Solar Systems SUNS..?Those Holograms(the pattern that the multi reflection makes with the various planetary bodies and Stars)Would take Billions-Trillions(And longer) of years to form..

[@strictlysmart7132]

J Krishnamurthy

[@BOMAco856]

I believe all this information, have for a long time. But im just curious, when we take a photo with a camera is the image an image of clapsed waves until we view the pictures image?

[@BuddhaLove77]

As a Buddhist I am finding this series very interesting. What I do believe is important to understand is that when Buddhist use the term that life is "illusory" they mean that it is illusory in terms of a permanent separate self. It is true that a Buddhist, if they are diligent, can experience that all phenomena are essentially impermanent, non localized and hence interare with all of reality or creation. However this insight is different, in my opinion, than saying we can posit life as a Holographic reality. Again in my opinion, as a Buddhist, the concept of holographic reality as it is shown in this video, is an attempt to concretize that which goes beyond rational linear thought, and hence the holographic theory while perhaps powerfully descriptive, will invariably fall short to the wonderful majesty of what we all experience and know as the "Great Life."

[@BlatendCrude]

The examples taken from movies take way to long..........Way...........! I get the fuckin'picture!!

[@ecargttol5913]

who wants to watch Commander Riker fall in love with a computer for five minutes right??? like really!!!

[@SniperWolf2024]

Ecarg Ttol not every one see's star trek..lol

[@ecargttol5913]

ZinayH lucky people.

[@gardengirl7446]

"I don't want to talk anymore about what's real and what's illusion. Life's too short to spend time thinking about life. Let's just live it!" One of the best movie quotes ever. Love Woody Allen! :)

[@rubyviolet95]

Garden Girl b

[@JohnTaylor-fh4et]

Garden Girl, each of us are trying to do that in our limited life spans, against an entity that spans ALL TIME. OH HOLY HELL.

[@JadenJahci]

annie hall

[@zenmeister451]

Garden Girl, The lyrics of "Beautiful Boy (Darling Boy)" contain the famous Lennon quote "Life is what happens to you while you are busy making other plans." However, the expression of this sentiment can be traced back to a 1957 Reader's Digest article, which attributes it to Allen Saunders. Love this quote!

[@ikigai3232]

Nana Benk, being bored is a state of mind.

[@MartinBraonain]

I'm only part way through these lectures (many thanks), but they echo with what I know about Kant and the set cognitive ways of viewing the world and structuring out experience.

[@jmitterii2]

That would be a great experiment! I've watched that segment. It starts with showing the person L or R button to press.The decision making process starts the ends pushing the button. My guess the experiment would show an exponentially diminishing advance time knowledge of the decision as you regress further people to see them formulate the decision or know the decision about to be made-- since its domain is in range of moment of first seeing which button to press and actually doing it is finite.

[@juntjoonunya9216]

Who understands the part he explains we have our OWN individual realities? To me it seems he never explained how that was figured out. I otherwise would think there is one hologram we all interpret a little differently

[@clubadv]

Very much agree. Like playing a multi-player game online, we are all downloading the same experience, but only different perspectives. This was where the creator lost me some and my red flag for having an agenda was raised. I bet the agenda shows up later.

[@MrRobertkroger]

if we viewed it differently at all, this means its different all together :)

[@JRichardson711]

Have you ever wondered how 2 people can have different accounts of the same event? Why is there always multiple sides to every story? Because each persons conscious attention is focusing on different things and they each notice and remember different parts of the experience. Have you ever watched the video where a group of people dribble basketballs and you’re supposed to count the bounces, and you’re so focused on the balls you never notice the gorilla walking through the middle of them all? If the narrator hadn’t asked about the gorilla I never would have saw it, it would not have been a part of my reality. Of course there is objective reality, and that does exist independent of what we consciously perceive, but what each person does perceive is different, creating different realities for all of us.

[@acdeucee]

But who is projecting the frequencies?

[@hypermecha223]

Did you watch part 3 yet?

[@acdeucee]

Dong that this afternoon...Thats where the answer lies?

[@MrKnaberaps]

Allah

[@acdeucee]

Yes the universal one mind... The ALL...or ALL ah~~~~~~~~~. Yes thanks :)

[@08Stella]

That'd be Consciousness, The Field itself I believe. Haven't watched Part III yet but this is just mind-blowing, jaw-dropping, so interesting & logical!! Everything I have learned through meditation and felt - eversince I'm 5 - is making sense finally. And yes, exactly, this is what the Bible calls God and Allah and so on... ONLY the religious population has (MIS)understood it as an 'old man sitting on a cloud who is "responsible" for everything on Earth'. They have translated that frequency/energy/higher power into their OWN human image. Wrongly. ...but people are waking up, we hear it more often that there is only one God for all of us, we just call it different and that God has no religion. God was just god. Like Buddha. He was not a Buddhist. It was his name. Brilliant brilliant brilliant stuff!!! :) xxx

[@nuvivliu]

Amazing. This explained so much about everything. The trick is to put it to use in our own objective reality.

[@Tedday1983]

I have a question about the eraser experiment. What if there was one observer looking at the data collected but not the results on the screen and another observer looking at the screen results but not the data collected and neither observer shared either results.. would that leave an interference pattern or would that be two slits only on the screen?

[@zewlybeans]

"The kingdom of god is within you"

[@nzt4890]

Hahaha. Thank you, I needed the laugh.

[@soham66]

All seems logical but what about people which are born blind? all is based on visual sense. So how it works then here. Or people which miss more then one sense?

[@dragondycegaming9890]

+Catharina Hosseini Damabi i didn't think of that, and hard to imagine people feeling pain, shaking of an earthquake inside a hologram.

[@soham66]

Well worked it for me out its not all about visual sense but thought. Thought produces images too or better conclusions, expectations. Thank you for your reply :) Have a nice day ! Merry xmas or whatever you celebrate :)

[@TillaMC]

Not really. You need to remember a important point, we are part of the hologram. In part 1 he used Minecraft as a example for things being visible and then disappearing when your view changes. Now think a little more on that game. Rules were programmed in similar to gravity and not passing through objects so they appear to be solid. If this is a holographic reality then I would imagine everything we experience is simply laws/rules programmed in. In some games if you walk over fire your character makes a noise due to pain and loses health. We know this is simply programming but to the character it would be real. Everything in the universe seems to fall into patterns of 2 which could be called binary codes. The golden ratio is phi and Fibonacci which are basically equations involving 2 numbers. Then DNA has 4 base genes which always have the same 2 pairs and also primer fields do appear to govern much of the universe (I also believe DNA are micro magnetic combinations of matter where as primerfields are on the macro scale) and are also iin 2 pairs of 2. North and south magnetic and north and south magnetic with reversed electrical polarity. It seems that there is a binary code within the universe. Michael Talbot explains quite well how holoism effects vision and memory and I would reccomend his book as it covers quite a vast viewpoint. I haven't finished it yet but I think we should be asking ourselves, "are we a form of artificial intelligence in a virtual world?" As explained in a previous comment, I think the brain shows its answer 6 seconds before the subject consciously decides is because our DNA is our programming, the program runs continusiouly as it should and when the programmed decision comes up it is shown in the scans built it takes 6 seconds for the subject to consciously become aware of said decision. I hope that makes sense.

[@sempa312]

did they put a observer at the point of projection? where the electron is shot from? is the electron a observer itself? I ask because it noticed there is an observer and then chose a specific location to enter, instead of a waves when it was not observed.

[@submoto]

Fair enough, bit what about 'interaction'? If one person projects a reality in order to perceive it, then what about the the projection of the person next to me? Do I perceive their projection, or is the person next to me, only someone I have projected?

[@gsteidinger]

I found the first two series as thought provoking and stimulating more so than much of the BS that is on TV. I understand that there are many skeptics who seem to doubt the theory. It has a ways to go to becoming a theory though. But I am giving it as much time as drones, guitars which is significant. ;-) thanks for your work --I have questions (1)In part (2) where the discussion takes places regarding response time of the brain, base on Dr. Libet's work I found several papers but none were none included the data you quoted in the video. What paper did you use to be able to come up with this numbers. ? (2) what happened to the 3-5 versions which were promised. I hae found duplicates of anything past (2) so I am finished with those. (3) Who is representing this body of work? (4) I am very interested, to the point of helping if I can. I am an engineer. But I need refereences, papers, like a science project and theory normally progresses. Is there forums with more intelligent readers

[@johngabris6293]

My question is if were holograms how come we can feel, see, touch and smell? Projectors on screens can't have these traits. Also how can we interact with a "hologram", touch it and not know its non-physical entity? This is to difficult to comprehend, or I'm just too stupid to grasp it.

[@stevecounts9277]

Anyone who puts on a true Virtual Reality headset (or who has experimented with LSD) can easily understand the concepts behind the theories presented in this video, however there are some basic fundamental principles that the creator of this series is conveniently failing to address. This is mostly a theory in search of facts instead of facts leading to a theory. It pretends to be the latter, but it is actually the former. This is not true science.

[@otggoddess2415]

ok so if something isn't mass until it perceived by you then how do people bump into things that they aren't perceiving but are still stop cold in their tracks because of it's mass. Example....one day my dumb ass was walking down the street with my friend and we were talking and I was listening intently to what she was saying and looking at her that I didn't realize or know there was a telephone pole in my way and banged right into it with out even knowing (perceiving) it was there. I didn't perceive it but still bumped into the mass. So I don't get it?????

[@otggoddess2415]

thank you :-) Now that brings me to another theory...about what the government is doing with the spraying, AI and other stuff.

[@otggoddess2415]

***** Thanks for the video. How do we become our own saviors and defeat the matrix and get to our higher selves or a state of higher self awareness?

[@apophis8118]

The telephone pole will always exist there even if all the conscious life in the universe disappeared because all it needs to be in the collapsed wave function is something else INTERACTING with it. When they say an observation is needed for it to be real they really mean an interaction needs to be happening.

[@JJtoob]

That is the biggest question left from the last video. This video answers that question by telling you the brain may construct reality prior to your being consciously aware of it. Gives meaning to the phrase "If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"

[@STroB]

You did perceived it. You just didn't noticed till it is too late. Example on how you perceived? Sound waves of your steps reflecting on that post. Another explanation, mass consciousness makes some things permanently physical until no one remembers that thing.

[@goemaeregert]

question about double slit: if the data of measurement is watched AFTER the result, what happens then?

[@andreluizeng]

there is any video showing the experiment described at 0:30 ? (30 min)

[@TheGhostFace187]

I do think science is backing up this theory but it's a relatively new idea and like lots of theorys at the beginning it will have many mistakes so don't take all this guy says as facts.

[@1212JackJohnson]

Radin's books have received negative reviews from skeptics and scientists.[6][7][8][9] A critical review of The Conscious Universe was published by the British mathematician I. J. Good in Nature. Good discovered flaws in Radin's method for evaluating the file-drawer effect and wrote the book avoided to mention evidence of fraud in parapsychology.[10] Victor J. Stenger also made a criticism of the book reflecting Good's arguments, arguing that Radin did not perform the file-drawer analysis correctly, made fundamental errors in his calculations and ignored possible, non-paranormal explanations for the data.[11] Brian Josephson published a web page responding to the critical review in Nature arguing that Radin's statistical methods were wrongly criticized.[12] Radin attempted to rebut Good in a follow up letter in the correspondence pages of Nature.

[@hubristime]

From what I've read, it's actually a very ancient idea, but this new one that seems to be on the way to catching up with it has forgotten that there are other entities apart from our own single Self that also contribute to the creation of reality. A reality that already had particle forms in it that allowed our brains to become in the first place which then allows us to participate in creation at the same time we are experiencing it - but at about 6 seconds slow. :> I guess the time-lapse is kind of like the opposite of the Langoliers in that Steven King story. The implication is we're authors as much as we are participants.

[@1212JackJohnson]

Yeah, right..... B|

[@tonygerald9244]

Good advice.

[@c-dubrizzle4860]

If this theory is true, how do I know my brain isn't just making it up as part of the holographic matrix. So am I'm the only person inside my own head and all these people here at work with me are simply here because I want them to be? My brain is making them my reality? I'm like God inside my brain, creator of my own domain? Someone help me clear my head! Wait... Am I talking myself? I'm asking myself questions because in reality, I'm the only one who exists.

[@indayshelley]

+Maximo Montalbano if we are creating our version of other people, why is it that we come across with people that we don't want to be in our lives?

[@cherishtheday2223]

chris rose Whether or not your brain is materializing this theory as part of the holographic matrix, it would prove that you are, indeed, living in a holographic universe.

[@mikeytobago]

we create by both fear and faith what we fear, and what we desire.

[@johngabris6293]

I believe apples will appear in my living room, right now, as I'm typing this comment. No apples. No hologram. This is what I can't comprehend, you can't just "think" things into reality. I can imagine apples, I can physically buy them in a store or go apple picking for them, but they can't appear without the work.

[@mikeytobago]

john, you and I, are just icons moving on a screen, like the computer games, i remember there was one, which a monkey was moved across the screen with a basket, under falling apples, even if the basket was full, the monkey got no apples, the programmer determines if you get apples, not you! thats the matrix

[@jcarhart]

Forgive my ignorance in advance for the following question. Are all senses treated equally? In other words, do all senses collapse the wave function, as vision does? If not, how is it possible (in a rare case; thought experiment) for a blind & deaf individual to create a '3D total immersion movie?'

[@MonkeySpecs301]

i maybe jumping ahead, but at 41:00 you state the scientist know the region of the brain being downloaded to. Looks to me from the image it is the pineal gland, is this correct??

[@DuaneScarlett]

We are the consciousness behind the veil, that is the real us. This physical reality is the illusion. I think that is the error that he is making in this video.

[@DuaneScarlett]

He makes a lot of reference to Bashar, well here is Bashar confirming this point www.roadofenlightenment.com/videos/bashar-physical-mind-higher-mind-can-work-together/

[@juntjoonunya9216]

Part three has this guy. Distinguishes between conceiving, perceiving and I forget the other.

[@johngabris6293]

Illusions are magic tricks, not real. How can my physical form be fake?

[@daxross2930]

John Gabris it’s not fake. It’s an illusion. Meaning it’s not as real as you believe it to be. It’s more “plastic”

[@jamesjordan139]

Dude that is what the video says , are you paying attention ? Put down the bong for a few minutes ....

[@nismozx6r]

Part 2 is interesting but you can see the propaganda starting to unfold.

[@MrTomEdo]

Indeed there are some skips in logic. Like the fact that according to this nothing has to exist. Just your mind. While simple Occams razor makes it unlikely since all these body parts evolved to allow us to funtion in this, holographic or not, our world.

[@maccmoses]

Lighten up Francis

[@undernetjack]

TomEdo That’s just it, if the Universe is holographic, there was NO evolution.

[@Yahshua40]

it makes purrfect seance to me. I Love these type of Q's

[@BLAZENYCBLACKOPS]

I have a question, how do we know how these particles react when we're not looking? When observed they act differently I get that part, but how could you know the outcome of something without observing it? My only guess is that these tests were done without observation/measuring and then repeated with observation/measuring, is that correct?

[@burgosco7024]

They don't exist

[@burgosco7024]

You cannot

[@burgosco7024]

Yes both

[@seanhenderson8870]

I think that Thomas Campbell does a really poor job of explaining the "double slit experiment". I also think that he should go ahead and do the experiment he theorizes about before he starts telling us what the logical conclusion of said undone experiments results are. Especially since the results of the "double slit experiment" are pretty illogical to begin with.

[@JP-hr3xq]

Sean Henderson How are the results illogical?

[@seanhenderson8870]

You watched the video right? The results were not what the scientists expected. The electrons went to the double slit as a particle and came through it and struck the second plate as a wave, which is not logical or what they expected. Then when they did it again but put a measuring device between the plates "observed," the electron struck the second plate as a particle, again not logical or what they expected. So for Thomas Campbell to tell us what the "logical"conclusion of experiments that have not been done yet, when his theories are based off data that were not logical to begin with, is nothing more than a guess. Yet he is presenting it as if it were a forgone conclusion. He tells us that he has not actually done the experiment but calls it the "logical equivalent" of having done it and then presents the results. If you want to see what I am talking about his part in the movie is around 1:04:00.

[@NsaNoReadThis]

Sean Henderson Here's a better description of the Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser Experiment: It's not the one T. Campbell describes but it's still a DCQE experiment that's been cited. I did some checking on T. Campbell and my psudoscience ears are tingling. He has 2 authorship citations with NASA, no cited biography online, no major journal articles, and a single book that's been cited 8 times by mystic journals. So far this series has been on point with my education, Campbell is the first person on here that's really tweaked my citation bias. DCQE - 1999 kzbin.info/www/bejne/fmerfZ2mn5mBqpY

[@NsaNoReadThis]

Sean Henderson Just FYI, the Libet experiments are at best controversial, there are several studies that are showing his results are simply brain-nerve compensations that naturally occur. Such as why we see and hear things (in close proximity) at the same time. The evolution of our brain has the visual cortex is more distant from the eyes while the auditory cortex is really close to the ears, we're making up for the time difference between light and sound. These adjustments done by the brain can explain Libet's results and remove the time reversal he claims. The medical experiment of 'randomly choosing which button to press' shows nothing more than the sub-conscience working separately from the conscience. Even the expert said, "The sub-conscience" knows before you do." That's how dreams work, we don't "know" them until we wake up. As for the 'downloading from the quantum field.' Well... citation needed. There's no evidence of a mechanism in the brain designed to receive quantum data from a cloud of information. Once he's done with the double slit experiment he jumps very quickly into pseudoscience and conjecture. I got halfway through the third video before it was too much conjecture with an utter lack of evidence. I may finish the third to see his "model" of the "conscience" choosing what to download. This isn't the first time someone's tied together their concept of quantum physics to come up with some pseudoscience apologetic explanation for God. Oh well, the first 1.6 or so videos were reasonably accurate.

[@seanhenderson8870]

NsaNoReadThis Someone removed your 1st comment as spam. I restored it. Not sure what that was all about. I didn't like T. Campbell's explanation of the double slit experiment or his extrapolations either. I read the book The Holographic Universe by Michael Talbot after watching this video series put together by Stephen Davis. The book was published in 1992 and some of the stuff is pretty dated but he pulls from a lot of different areas. The video uses mostly references and information from the book but where the video and the book differ is that Michael Talbot thinks that by knowing the nature of the holographic universe we can potentially change it. Stephen Davis says that we have absolutely no control of what happens but we have 100% control of how we react to what happens or feel about it. In essence the video agreed in nearly every way with the book and then at the very end the video hijacked the conclusion of the book and did and entire about face and said the opposite of what the book said. I wasn't really sure how to feel about that, but according to Stephen Davis that is the only thing I actually have any control about in the end. So I guess I will just get over it. . . .

[@someyoungguyjohnson7239]

I don't like the direction this (end of part 2) is going....I sense a personal opinion coming. Furthermore, I didn't like his waitress/ Brad Pitt/car accident--perception examples, I think those are flawed, for various reasons. I'll try to keep an open mind but I think part 3 is going to stray into pseudo-science, and God/Master/Creator/Overlord bullshit, a common and very human mistake. Also, he misquotes Einstein, which is annoying.

[@ajakubo11]

I watched part three, and you sir, are quite correct :D. Couldn't watch it to the end :). Well, at least the first two parts were OK ;).

[@Arch1994]

What makes you say Master/Overmind/Overlord ideas are bullshit? Just want to see what you think!

[@ArchaeanDragon]

Yeah, I had to stop in the middle of this one. The New Age woo-woo started to really come out, even though I could see the beginnings of it in the first video when he started misinterpreting the research and then repeating those misinterpretations for emphasis. I mean, I like taking the results of scientific research into subjects such as cosmology, cosmogony, quantum mechanics, superstring theory, M-theory, etc, and seeing how they adjust my holistic view of the universe in my own personal search for truth, but you have to take the research in whole, in context, properly interpreted, and properly understood before you can reconcile it properly with your worldview. When you cherry-pick, oversimplify, misinterpret, and blindly accept items on faith, you pollute the truth you have accumulated and are trying assimilate into your model of reality, which leads you away from understanding the nature and purpose of the universe, not towards it. I realize a lot of it comes from basic ignorance of science and even logic, but that's no excuse to remain ignorant of it. As the old adage goes, it's not a crime to be ignorant; the only crime is in remaining so.

[@strawman8852]

Very good. I am enjoying this. What about when you are walking and you fall down a hole in he ground that you didn't see. Do you know what I mean. I didn't see the hole so it shouldn't have been there? Is this a silly question?

[@SniperWolf2024]

you think you are in control of your life now.. Now I see more bigger proof God is more than real, its everything, some intelligent (conscious) energy out there created all this, and we are just in his imagination, and we are living his dream, so we should give thanks to the universe which is God! thanks! for giving everything to at least live and know what is out there!

[@mikeytobago]

and God said let there be and there was........this is the secret of the field. this is the code, his word, create and continue to create.this is the program that run things, we are the result of his word..... let there be......

[@johngabris6293]

So if we wake up, then were in heaven with Him?

[@SabreenSyeed]

John Gabris "All humanity is asleep and they wake up when they die" Imam Ali

[@SabreenSyeed]

ZinayH God is the Absolute Consciousness!! Allah, God etc are different names for the same Being!

[@agod5608]

God, which god....?

[@g0lanu]

That's stupid, you're jumping gun and reaching ludicrous conclusions by mixing researches that don't relate to each other.

[@hubristime]

Yea, that part at the end regarding different people's reactions to other people is simple basic psychology - not evidence of individual holograms, but it does serve to point out how dangerous it is to only rely on experts that mostly only think in terms of their own particular field of study, and may tend to forget other things simply because they haven't studied them yet. After that, it sometimes gets disappointing continuing to listen since you know you need an information filter to get through the rest of it.

[@g0lanu]

hubristime I've made the effort and went through the hole video, but it boils down to 1:04:18 and after. It all relies on the fact that consciousness affects the double slit experiment, which it doesn't. The experiment is affected by the measurement, which is performed by a DEVICE. The device behaves consistently, the experiment results are 100% predictable. I want to hear this explained, WHERE do they think consciousness starts to play a role in all of this? At what point does the particle go: oooh, look, photo cameras, let's pose like a diva?

[@TotalNormalMusic]

He has done a good job at collecting research, and there is scientific base for this assumption. However, he should have refrained from sharing his own "conclusions".. that's where things start to go bad. His thinking is just too simplistic, based on basic logic errors and one feels like the tone of the documentary goes all of a sudden from science vulgarization to a discussion you could have with a drunken friend at a bar.

[@g0lanu]

TotalNormalMusic :) I wish I could give OP the benefit of the doubt as you do. OP is just one person in a long line of people that try to disproof "materialism" by linking hard research results through the means of wishful thinking, thus reaching the amazing conclusion that once you think about it, all we have its thoughts. Its why philosophy should be taught in tech schools and the sciences taught in art schools. People finish up these schools lacking in ability to use their entire brains, repeating the mistakes of past philosophers re-iterating ideas that are settled (or if not settled, in a manner that has been proven incorrect). Thus going for the esoteric or the reductionist explanations. Neither extreme is pretty.

[@Eezapropageeza]

TotalNormalMusic I view this stuff as material I can have drunken discussions about lol. The most important thing any of us can really do is to create new things that solve problems for people. Give people what they want, like or need in exchange for value (money, favours, whatever) and the world turns progressively. Many great people seemed to have done this, so maybe my life would improve if I try to emulate them in my own way. And it doesn't matter if I think this stuff is true or baloney - as long as I create.

[@SimonDimes]

I always try to give this holographic universe theory a chance but these guys always sound idiotic. 1.so my mother's house doesn't exist when I'm not looking at it.2 millions if people recognize the same brad pitt and 3 we watch the same super bowl with the same teams .so the hell do we all a have private realities?????

[@austindmunday]

We all have private realities that are interacting with other private realities.

[@ramos3x]

1 I´m from Brazil and I don´t care about your mother´s house ... 2 In Brazil millions of people have never been to the cinema...Brad who? 3 Super what ? Americans ...

[@dpraptorP]

***** Its not that simple, if someone taps you on the back they certainly exist. But this theory seems to have an amazing amount of support, and even makes sense when you understand about NDEs. You should do a lot more learning before discarding it so.

[@dpraptorP]

***** Well, its hard to refute what some of the smartest people in the world are saying, unless you actually know more then they do. If these guys are seeing this as a result of their study, then they are on to something. Just because you decide to not believe it does make it untrue. But you need to open your mind a little and look at the evidence and spend some thought on it before dismissing it . In the movie The Matrix, most people would have been happy to stay as the living batteries without seeking or discovering the truth. If you choose that path you will learn little of importance in your life. This could the most important and profound discovery in our history, so understand it before you make up your mind

[@dpraptorP]

***** Its starting to look like that now!

[@keesvetter5727]

Can anybody get me a link to part tree of this serie.I have a hart time finding it. Thank you.

[@heather937]

This makes me think of Seth Speaks by Jane Roberts. Jane Roberts channeled a consciousness called Seth from another plane of existence which was apparently a non physical energy. She did this over the 1960s, 70s and 80s until she died. She wrote several books channeling Seth, transcribed by her husband and was highly regarded. In the books Seth talks about us choosing to live in the physical reality, and creating the universe through idea construction, the consciousness lives outside the brain. I see some parallels with the holographic universe idea here. I suggest people read it, it's very complex and I'm still getting my head around it but fascinating.

[@kyleernst328]

New Age "Course on Miracles" mixed with science of Quantum Physics. Mumbo jumbo with a psuedo godless scientific twist. This is closer to protestant christian "biblecode411" or "give and get a blessing" style religion than science. Frankly I am disgusted good science is being manipulated to define some mystical get rich quick scheme.

[@j0584924]

Can I like your comment twice?

[@kyleernst328]

j0584924 few agree with me on anything...are you certain you want to do that? Thanks...

[@j0584924]

Joshua Lerner, I agree with you that many things concerning the nature of reality cannot be proven. And I believe that the universe, yes, might be a hologram. However, the author of the video uses other's ideas to misinform and misguide the viewers. For example, one of the things discussed by quantum mechanincs is the concept of measurement and observer. If you see the quantum eraser experiment, the observer doesn't have to be a conscious being to cause the collapse of the wavefunction. A measurement/observation is simply a form of interaction that entangles the states of the systems in a way to cause decoherence.

[@kyleernst328]

Joshua Lerner I am still open to this and made observations not judgements. Why is it a judgement? I am merely pointing out the illogical aspects of this mixing of science and mystical enlightenment. Mixing a Course on miracles with quantum physics is like trying to mix oil and water. Have you ever read the Course on Miracles?

[@rwoz]

j0584924 In what way is it an interaction, to just observe?

[@GordonDykes]

This comment didn't exist till you read it.

[@lazarus8011]

For ten years this comment has been not existing waiting for me to make it so

[@Remedynr]

I read a book once, that quoted some "old school" sayings, like "A man is a stars way of experiencing itself" meaning, the star material that formed everything, come to evolve into something that can observe it's creator. Meaning our minds don't necessarily have to be the source of reality. the source is the field, and the field works in a hologram manner. But we, our consciousness is the next level of evolution of matter, something that reacts to the field.

[@jamesalbion6684]

So what is the field, and where do the waves and frequencies originate?

[@SIMKINETICS]

Linking likely supernatural speculation to science is a disgrace that stains the reputation of science among most of the population. At best, this holographic model of reality represents a theory with no honest link to real science. The Higgs-Boson particle & Quantum Mechanics are the new favorite themes for supernaturalism because they involve assumptions that defy conventional logic, while being robust enough to allow predictions based on some strange mathematics; however, the knowledge is fairly limited to testable hypotheses in science. How does anyone test the validity of this theory with evidence & metrics data? This simply breaks its link to science, therefor it should be regarded as pseudoscience, and clearly labeled as such. The public must learn the distinction.

[@robertturffs3596]

SIMKINETICS the less one can touch or readily observe, leads one to embellish a little. While wild stabs in the dark are not science, their still entertaining to a degree.

[@staticsociety6956]

SIMKINETICS you may like to read Society of the Spectacle.... if you haven't already. ye.... this is a society stuck in speculation.

[@Ziplock9000]

This is not the holographic universe or principle. This is your own pseudo science version

[@zonta71]

@john stock, and thats coming from a paranomal investigatior... i gotta hold on to something before i fall over laughting

[@Ziplock9000]

bibi kola A paranormal investigator who does not believe in the paranormal. Get your facts right first.

[@zonta71]

the simple fact of life is that what we know today will be wrong tomorrow...knowledge is all about thinking out of the box..and the angle of paranormal investigation to debunk it is somewhat a none starter... the holographic universe is looking it the dual behaviour of light properties..if it only exist when we look at it then something isnt right about of current "understanding" of how we look at the world.. if the alternate exists without looking at it, then its only a matter of time to figure out how to view it in its alternative state and if we cant then the universe may be a hologram afterall..and if his is pseudo science then what is paranormal investigation about? isnt paranormal a pseudo "spiritual realm" existance? come on John Stock time to drop the shovel...stop digging your hole...and thanx youngaset

[@zonta71]

true KG Chong...but John Stock has no clue what his on about and is still trying to debunk that the world is round...the gizza makes me laugh out really loud

[@Ziplock9000]

bibi kola Yes I do. There is a very clearly defined mainstream definition if the holographic universe. This shit this video talks about is made up pseudoscience claptrap that gas no scientific background.

[@Daneilboone1]

I will try this tonight when I get home. You have been very helpful. Thank you.

[@luisqp66]

quick question 🙋, if our brains are like computers who can represent energy waves (field) in to holograms, from where our brains come from ? Are your brains also holograms? Can hologram project other holograms ?

[@ronaldchannel]

Question will be answered in the David icke’s book, the phantom self.

[@mapex173]

does anyone know what date this video is?

[@clarewu7989]

So how do you know that they are waves if everytime you watch them they change to particles. Have they every been see as waves.

[@FR0NTI3RJU5T1CE]

This is all very interesting...however, I have a sincere question: When they (experts within the documentary) say that these waves "pop" into (perceived) matter when observed, are they referring to visual observation? The reason I ask is, if you are in a room you've never been in before and it is pitch black (you cannot see your hand in front of your face), how does this theory account for when you run into an object (say, a chair) that was not visually observed? I assume that the holographic reality that pops in to (perceived) existence is one that is not created/controlled by us but, instead, some external influence?

[@JaneenDaniellCain]

I absolutely love entertaining the theory! Current evaluations and understanding of quantum phenomenon are certainly heading in the right direction. However, we should be careful not to literalize the metaphor or constrain the theory with the use of our finite minds.

[@tehUnabonger]

observed, we again cannot see the wave, and only see the particle, and only the particles pattern. am i missing something?

[@gmon78]

I can't seem to find part 3 of this series on KZbin. Saying that it's almost 2am so I may just not be seeing it looking right at me. Can someone please point me in the right direction?

[@KayLued]

+gmon78 www.mediafire.com/watch/2qzy6vb6j1imjcp/The_Holographic_Universe_-_Part_Three.m4v

[@velvetmaat5851]

gmon78 kzbin.info/www/bejne/d5mQp6mMi8yMo6M

[@idvhfd]

So the pain you're getting after hitting a wall is generated by/channeled through the eyes?

[@techtiptricks]

What happens if you shoot the particles thru a stencil?

[@libranguy01]

Say if I am in US and remote login to computer in UK then I can work on it without looking at the actual computer or touching it and without even being aware of the actual piece of hardware. The point is that the computers were constructed by us as objects and may not work if all its atoms are not behaving as particles and in existance...or will it still?

[@nikhiljy]

Here is a question after having watched Mr. Campbell's explanation till time 1:11 ......... What happens if , instead of burning the detector packets right away, you take a look at the measurement screen?....will it show the interference pattern? If it does, what if you then burn up the info from the detector packet without looking at it? Does the measurement screen for those packets change back to 2 lines? I think we are missing something? Maybe he is simplifying the experiment too much.

[@sagewithin5949]

I have uploaded the full version of part 3 on my page. Couldn't find it anywhere else..

[@MrDAVEYSCOTT]

Has it been deleted

[@Roylamx]

@@MrDAVEYSCOTT The link on holographicuniverseworkshops.com still works for part three: kzbin.info/www/bejne/d5mQp6mMi8yMo6M

[@travelindavetv]

Absolutly clear and fantastic info and awakenings

[@ljupcoilievski1120]

The best in the net , with the best voice ever 💟

[@adrianaboites7028]

i really like it so far, it can be the answer to many cuestions but however there is not such a thing as 2D plate in the 3D

[@legalweed4all]

We all see Brad Pitt a little differently :) I love this series so far, I just had to comment when I heard that; made my day lol. But seriously, this discusses some very awesome and enlightening concepts, keep up the good work.

[@aftermathovich]

35:00 whats the name of bbc program?

[@Mahabhoot]

Give me The Link of That BBC Documentary

[@moqutpar]

Okay so what I want to know... is how to control what part of the field I am downloading and collapsing into reality.

[@JamieJetsonTV]

I can't even get part one to play. It just plays a comercial, and then goes to part 2. You should have KZbin remove the comercial, and see if that fixes the problem. I'd really like to watch it. Thank you.

[@virgilschmidt1599]

The test at 32:57 ... The x-ray image being reviewed in the interview. The image was a vertical cross-section. I'm not referring to the color computer imaging. And it looked to me that is the location of the 6th chakra or 3rd eye.

[@fridusfroetzl]

Nice presentaton as a stepping stone to an even more radical explanation of our perceived reality. The brain was the one true unshakable reality in this video, which was helpful for gaining insight. Now we need to acknowledge that brains are also part of "the hologram". What has been left out of the equasion so far is the question: "who or what is observing, who am I". In the end we'll see that there is only 1 consciousness. Perceived separation part of this reality.Perrennial wisdom catching up

[@ChilliFedor]

Who or what controls the or chooses the field?

[@tyke471]

Theres no part 3 that i can find?

[@petersenlightenment]

I've been doing meditation with binary beats, Shuman resonance and others. Is it possible to reach the broadcaster? How do we know that we are more than information on a data storage devise? Are we some computer game for amusement? In the Truman film where the director is going to drown him when he try's to reach outside the illusion. The reality of being in a one on one life drama is overwhelming, & a little heavy. I had a NDE, I saw myself on the hospital gurney, was I taped into the feed?

[@Drstrangeclock]

The slit scan problem reminds me of the question."If a tree falls down and nobody is around to hear it fall, does it make a sound?"

[@tehUnabonger]

i.e. - we observe that we have a particle (observing removes the posibility of seeing the wave half of the partnership) - we place the observed particle into 'particle cannon' - we shoot. - unobserved, it created both the particle and wave patterns, the particle pattern obviously being shaded over by the wave patters, making them harder/impossible to tell them apart from the wave interference. it even shows the 2 front slits as more 'intense' with the 'wave interference'.

[@Daveyboyroy]

Interested to know what people's thoughts are regarding individual consciousness surviving bodily death, if we assume the holographic reality model is true. Does anyone have any hunches or thoughts? I'm only just beginning to get my swede around all this!

[@cipriancernat3020]

The electron pops out in existance when it is observed. What if there are more than one observer? Does it matter if it is one or more observers?

[@denverjamesduran2750]

just want to ask. If the Brain had already processed the "hologram" from the event (pricking the finger) , I mean the brain already knew about it even before it happened, then WHY do the brain was not able to determine or know that someone intends to stimulate a signal directly from the brain before it happened? (I hoped someone has understood my question)

[@rdkg2]

Yes tough it is. Theories are hard enough and then we have language. Trying to form ideas, patterns, symbols into what we are seeing in our minds. And then to relate it over an internet with no way to see body language or hear expressions in the voice. It's amazing that we're able to communicate at all. I think maybe that's why many blog sites are nothing but people insulting one another. Thanks for a civil conversation.

[@tatoforever]

So we project the incoming wave data in order to perceive it? I guess we send back that data into the field once perceived?

[@SilconOne]

I understand what you are try to say here however it is more plausible that we are not describing what reality is but how we interpret it. it seem more likely that our brains and vision work the same way an holographic system works not that we are in a holographic universe. On the same token if this is true and we are a hologram then how dose concessions fits into this model. and where is the source of this hologram

[@stefanfincken4359]

Does this mean time is actually moving backwards and we only interpret it as going forwards? That would explain the lack of free will, because whatever is going to happen has in a a sense already happened. Maybe the interferense pattern, is reversed if I may compare the '"receiver" (brain) to a lense.

[@khamarupa]

I really want to see group experiments. I'm curious if instead of destroying all 50 measurements, say 10 of them were taken out and given to 10 people who observed the measurement portion, but not the resulting pattern, but didn't share their observation with those who viewed the patterns. If we all have a separate holographic "reality" how would that play out, exactly. Hope some group experiments are covered in upcoming segments!

[@arindamkar01]

when u decide to reach your cabinet/back-pocket u are actually observing it not by your eyes but by touch in this case. u have to understand that the cabinet has probabilities of being in ur room and every other point in space at the time you touched it but the probability of the cabinet being in your room is by far greater than its probability of being somewhere else in space and so when you see or touch it would almost always appear to be in ur room

[@FredLynch]

The experiment at 29:10 absolutely blew my mind!

[@lawrencehon1260]

a question for the 6 second experiment: What if I keep randomly changing my mind rapidly? LLRLRLLLRRLR (decide + press button) RRRLRLLRLRRLLRL (decide + press button) RLRRLRLRLRLRLLRRLR (decide + press button), then I got a result Right, Left, Right. Can you tell which (L or R in the sequence) are my original decisions? Are they the one at exactly 6.00000 second before I press the button?

[@barrye9590]

I just got done watching part 1 and am here to watch part2! so it has me interested! I often find myself asking, for the believers on god? how can this belief coincide with god believing people?! is there a answer to that? any in put would be greatly appreciated. thank you

[@redlunch]

To really test the claims at 30:00 you'd need to do a test where the machine tells you what choice you're going make after it's known but before you make it. I would bet that you could then change your choice and that all they're really seeing is that the test subject began the path towards his choice 6 seconds earlier, but not the actual choice.

[@ThatBastardSnow]

So what is a wave form?

[@stratcaptain66]

I'm really enjoying this series, it's the 2nd time watching it. It makes a whole lot of sense...if that makes any sense lol. My father gave me a lot of advice throughout my early life, one piece really stands out now, he said "don't take life too seriously"...well said dad :)

[@killco1971]

is this helping me comprehand?

[@sunghyunkim77]

Many of us have long been conscious that experience and memory within our brain is the representation of external world event or object transmitted by means of physical signal(lightwave, sound, etc.). What is really illusory is the REPRESENTATION of the physical reality that EXIST out there, I mean memory of the signal from outside. But he seems to instill the ideology that even the physical reality out there is also illusion.

[@user-oh1vi6qm5z]

where are the rest 3episodes?