Hi friends…
I have read in a few books and some of the comments here that what the mind actually perceives and experience only it reveals in the dream.
for ex: If u experience tumbling stomach pain in our early days we might get the same experience through dreams, also when we happen to see some pic of foriegn destination we may get a dream about it…
But the irony is that in a lucid dream we can go to any place (not even we had seen b4, it happens even in a ND), we can experience anything we havent experienced b4, like, having sex, being a bird, flying etc…How something that we have not experienced in real life, we can experience in a ND/LD?
This proves again and again that we are all connected by one Universe…
Well, actually, no it doesn’t. Of course nobody has experienced how it is to fly with wings on one’s back IRL so we can’t tell how it really feels like.
Still we are able to fly in our dreams, but this doesn’t prove that we are all connected in any way. It just proves that the human mind is capable of many things we are not aware of. You don’t need to experience something yourself IRL in order to experience it in a dream.
Never seen a movie which includes sex, magic and flying heros? Have you never rode a roller coaster and felt the sensation of the free fall? If you even have the slightest idea what flying and having sex etc. might feel like your mind is able to create all those feelings and emotions based on what comes close to this and what you’ve already experienced, seen, read or heard about. Everything that happens in a dream and what you haven’t experienced in this way IRL is the result of a mix of everything which comes close to the dream’s topic.
Yes, that’s true, because the subconscious is capable of visualising anything. However, if you want to visit a real, existing place, you must see it IRL. Not necessarily travel there, but i.e. look at some photos, TV or something. If you don’t do that, that place will not look like IRL.
For instance, I’ve never been to New York, but I have dreamt about being there. You may ask, how do I know how NY looks like? My dream about NY is created based on the images I have seen on postcards, photos and movies involving New York. These sights are enough to visualise a city you’ve never been to, and you don’t need any “Universal minds” or anything like that to make it possible.
I haven’t experienced sex IRL, but I have in my dreams. And since sexual arousal is a natural feature of the human body, the brain is responsible for all the emotions you feel. You don’t need any universal mind to know how you should feel. Our body fixes that, it’s the instinct.
Noone knows what it’s like to be a bird, but our dreams are formed by our expectations. We can guess how something will feel, even before experiencing it. Our expectations are formed by our logic. If you are about to fly in a dream, you will make logical expectations, how flying will feel. You make those expectations unconsciously. For instance:
- Since I’ll be flying, wind should be rushing trough me. I should feel the wind.
- Flying should be like riding a rollercoaster. When descending quickly, I should feel the tingling sensation in my stomach, since I’m falling freely.
etc.
Our logical expectations decide how we will feel during our flight. Then, the dream creates the scenario. No universal minds needed, it’s pure logic and common sense.
As I said, either based on external information (photographs, movies, stories heard from others etc.) or based on our instinct (sex, emotions etc.) or by logical expectations (I’ve never tasted apple ice cream, but since it’s made from apples, it should taste like apples).
Yes, we all live in one Universe, but we are not connected in any way. A human being is an independent, seperate organism, which can’t “connect” to other humans by any scientifical or biological means. To prove your statement, you must try harder.
To make that statement you must depart from scientific reasoning, and enter the realms of personal opinion. It’s not scientific to make a vehement statement of denial such as “but we are not connected in any way.” , especially not when the human brain and consciousness is not fully understood. Don’t allow your distaste for somebody else’s beliefs and your personal philosophy that anything not proven or provable empirically or considerable theoretically is not worth considering, drive you to start a personal campaign to quash what you see as “silly ideas.” I agree that what was described here doesn’t prove we are connected, but I don’t agree with your assertions in this paragraph.
Dear Paulius,
My post here may not be ample evidence to prove that interconnectibility in universe do exist. But research proves that phenomenom like ‘Telepathy’, ‘Astral Projection’, ‘Shared Dreams’ indeed do exists and the universe is indeed interconnected.
Last year i dreamt of my friend of 12 yrs since school days. I havent met/seen her for 3 years, as i was thinking about her and how good it will be if we meet again, she came visiting me. I asked her why suddenly she dropped to check me, then i was amazed to find that she too thought of meeting me suddenly.
Always sont rationalize everything…I do agree science offers quite lucid explanation to everything, but ‘Lucid dreaming’ and other phenomenon itself was a subject of much debate in Science and once it was concluded lucid dreaming isnt possible. Our universe is ever expanding and what science can know about the nature of universe is only a drop in the ocean…
It depends here what you mean by evidence. If you mean evidence of the type used in scientific circles, then I’m afraid by that definition your post provides no evidence. If you mean personal evidence, then your post provides personal evidence, but personal evidence is just that, personal. It doesn’t prove anything to others who don’t feel/think the same way, basically you describe why you believe the way you do.
I’d like to stress here that I’m not trying to undermine you or say you are wrong. It just seems a mistake to me to believe what you cite is powerful evidence to all, and will lead to disappointment when people reject your evidence. ‘Evidence’ has a very specific meaning in scientific circles. The use of that specific meaning has also given us a lot though the progress it has facilitated. More than proving its worth.
I fully disagree here I’m afraid. For one thing, if any of these had been proven in a peer reviewed article or even a good methodology had been developed to test them, beyond those which have already been used and not succeeded, it would have been publicised very loudly. The implications of any of them is huge in terms of understanding our own nature and connection to reality. There are many sites that seek to ‘prove’ with ‘research’ I’d be cautious not to get sucked into pseudo science (fake science), or unreliable, unverified experiments, for it runs rampant in such places.
Here you explain why you choose not to adopt the same philosophy that Paulius seems to embrace. That philosophy being that “anything not proven or provable empirically or considerable theoretically is not worth considering.” Neither you nor he are right here, you both just have opinions.
GreenDragon, I agree with your thoughts, just stating the scientific point of view here…
Lucky1990, maybe you’re not aware of it, but these phenomenoms you’ve mentioned have not been proven by any means. If fact, scientists are disproving these theories, because they don’t see any biological feature of the human body which could be responsible for such phenomenon.
You may ask why Lucid Dreaming is proven then? The answer is simple - Lucid dreaming does not involve any connections between humans/universes/gods whatever… It’s just a pure independent dream. That’s why it wasn’t hard to prove for scientists like S. LaBerge. All what was needed - theoretical explanations & practical experiments. Neither theoretical explanations, nor any scientifical experiments have been done successfully on telepathy, astral projection, shared dreams, or universal minds. Therefore, it’s not proven by science at the moment.
Dear Paulius,
‘Not proven’ doesnt mean ‘doesnt exist’. Science cannot and never will be able to prove these phenomenon, jus like how science cannot fully predict the occurence of apocalypse or tsunami. U r looking evrything from science point of view.
Well, i have got my own personal experience with telepathy. there have been occasions where while doing meditation i ‘spoke’ with my friend to visit me. as expected, he came visiting me and more suprisingly said that i called him and asked him to come. I have resolved serious difference of opinion through ‘mind talk’.
As you said, when ‘rationalizm’ and ‘spiritualism’ is clashing, there is no point in getting it further. It all drains down to personal realization and i am lucky to have realized and experienced such phenomenom.
Actually, if such phenomenon does exist, it means that it is scientifically possible. Therefore, there will come a day, when it will be proven, just like lucid dreams.
Everything, what is possible will be explained someday, it’s just a matter of time. However, if it doesn’t exist, it can’t be proven.
About the apocalypse and tsunami…
Science can predict an “apocalypse”, if you mean an meteorite crashing into the earth, or a supernova sending deadly gamma ray bursts. Apocalypses, caused by natural means can always be predicted, but not stopped.
However, no meteorites or dangerous supernovaes have been spotted at this time, so we are pretty safe 
.
Tsunami can also be predicted. If there’s an earthquake, let’s say, 2000km from the coast of Japan, it’s already obvious, that a tsunami will hit Japan. Therefore, there’s always enough time to warn people to stay further away from the sea. Natural disasters can always be predicted.
The only natural disaster, which is uncertain at the moment is an earthquake, since it can only be predicted minutes before the action itself. That’s very little time, so scientists are working hard to find ways to predict earthquakes even earlier, hours or days before the action. Reading magazines on this subject, I see they have put lots of work into it, so don’t be surprised if you hear, that all natural disasters and apocalypses will become possible to predict.
Are you for real?
Yes, i have read in many books that telepathy is indeed possible. More than this, i myself have experienced telepathy…
i have experienced telepathy. slight edit i told this girl what she was thinking. she went white and started crying. poor girl
drug reference removed. 
Our mind is such an amazing thing. It can create experiences connected to our senses that we’ve never experienced before just by imagining what it would be like.
There’s a lot science can’t prove, and a lot science won’t touch because it is out of their knowledge, so to speak. They leave a lot of unresolved things up to the philosophers, such as “what comes after the universe?” or “If there were no humans on the planet would a rose still have color?” etc. Things like that.
It’s a bit premature in my opinion, to say “science can’t prove/examine/consider X” Science is persistently changing. At its very most fundamental level, true science always maintains that any theory, no matter how good, useful or accurate, will be reassessed if reliable evidence (scientific definition of evidence is implied here.) arises which challenges it or indicates that the current theories don’t take something into account; that a prediction they make is off. Science is a model building system, a very powerful one, and the models have the power to change in ways even the most intelligent scientists of the day can’t necessarily foresee.
It is a personal choice to consider things that can’t be proven via scientific method as possible and where to draw the line on what should be given credence. Personally I don’t consider suggestions like “If there were no humans on the planet would a rose still have color?” to have value outside of a mental exercise in argumentation or an anecdotal example of the limits of our sphere of awareness, but that’s my personal stance and deviates from my point. Regardless of where that line is drawn, we all draw it somewhere. So in that light, it’s not a case of it leaving a lot up to the philosophers. It’s entirely down to individuals to decide what to consider from an non-empirical source and indeed if there is a point considering things that can’t be proven empirically at all.
Yes, but what lucky1990 is talking about is a paranormal phenomenon.
These days the science is advanced enough to clearly and bravely state, that they can’t exist.
It’s not like we are in the middle-ages. It’s all common logic sense.
I don’t see how science can make such a statement, since doing so seems to betray its fundamentals. I can see how it can say, “there is no scientific evidence of such things.” and even “It doesn’t fit with current models.” but to me it isn’t scientific to state something vague like this, can’t or doesn’t exist. The reason being making such a statement assumes current theories are complete and not open to be amended. I oppose such a position as it is harmful to scientific growth. From my perspective here is where the scientifically minded fall prey to the exact same trait that many spiritual and religious people do. Believing they know some fixed fundamental truth about the universe and rejecting other ideas out of hand.