 You reached out to me because you saw that I interviewed Stanley Kripner, right? Yes, correct. But I'm not into parapsychology. But we, Stan and I are both in the same society for consciousness studies, which is where we met. Yeah. Nice. Yeah. And consciousness is, I'm not a psychologist. I stumbled into this, oh, I don't know, 25, 30 years ago, totally serendipitously. One of those things were just one thing followed on to another. I basically am a self-ysiologist. And I was, for my entire career as a bench scientist, I was looking for some way out of the circularity of physiology. And I finally discovered it after many years in realizing that I had amassed enough data myself and other colleagues who made a living out of studying lung development, which is very important as, you know, obviously. John and I have the line here that I think it actually is what peaked my interest most in your LinkedIn bio. And I'll read it right now. Turns out that alveoli are the structural means by which the lung was modified to increase oxygenation in response to the metabolic drive for vertebrate evolution. So cool. Right. Yeah. Yeah. And that's, that's remained, I mean, it's a given. We've been remonstrant, I guess is the correct word, by a French physiologist that Henry said in 2014 in a paper about physiology. He said we make a systematic error in defining physiology based upon function. That's a tautology. It's teleologic. It's never going to get us to where we want to be. So the central question then is, well, what is physiology? And so I and a benchmate of mine in the laboratory I trained in at McGill University in Montreal had discovered that the way that pattern formation and embryology actually transpires is through cellular communication. That was just emerging. Stan Cohen, for example, won the Nobel for his discovery of epidermal growth factor. That's an aside, though. But what that actually did was I just, I just wrote a paper about the lattice work of physiology. The lattice work of physiology and the lattice work of the cosmos are basically one and the same. Yeah. And I say that is because Lynn Margulis, a former professor of mine, is an undergraduate that formulated the symbiogenic principle of how it is that we evolve through the assimilation of factors in the environment that pose existential threats. For her, the transition was the assimilation of bacteria that then formed mitochondria. At the time, she had limited information. Now it's a well given recognized fact. But the point is that in doing so in assimilating factors from the environment, we have been backed into having to ascribe to the same laws of nature that the cosmos does. That's where our consciousness actually resides. And so I'm not a panpsychist. That's the idea that everything is conscious. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that we have affected the consciousness of the physics of the cosmos by utilizing factors in the environment. A classic example is iron and the heme protein that carries oxygen around the circulation in red cells. Iron ordinarily would be a potent oxidizing agent that would kill us. But in fact, you make it useful. And that goes on and on and on. So I think that the one thing that is unique about so the 200 papers I've published, 100 of them actually relevant directly to cellular evolution and the seven books I've published is that every other investigator, every other person who's considered physiology, the origins of physiology consciousness has looked at it in what's referred to as a synchronic way in real time. What you need to do is you have to go across time, space and time. That's diachronic. And in so doing, what you do is you shed the material aspects. And what you're now focusing on is the energy flows that are actually the essence of who we are. We mistake ourselves as being material beings. I'm fully in agreement with Whitehead Alford North. Whitehead was the one who said that we are basically energy. Matter is an epiphenomenon. And I don't mean to sound mystical, although it may sound that way. But even in the process of embryology, which kind of has been my bread and butter, as we look at the process of embryology from the fertilized egg to the morula, to the gastrolyte, ultimately to the offspring, that's actually a series of high energy phosphate exchanges. So that's why I say it's clearly energy exchange. And that doesn't cease until we die. Basically, physiology is the homeostatic control of that energy. So I think that's an important concept. And it's not easy to get your head around initially, but I think it's important in really trying to understand why we are here and what it is that we are. So in my laboratory, for example, at UCLA, we do epigenetic research. So epigenetics is everything but the DNA code itself. And we study the effects of parental cigarette smoking on childhood asthma, a well-known epidemiological phenomenon. We've shown that nicotine, one of the 3,000 components of cigarette smoke, actually causes childhood asthma. And it can do so for at least four generations. And the way that that works is through the assimilation of nicotine in the environment. Nicotine is a yellow, oily substance, and it sticks to all these surfaces. And and then so the organism, so an infant crawling around on the floor is going to pick this stuff up and it's going to absorb it. And what happens is biochemically, it gravitates towards the egg and sperm in the ovaries and testes of the organism. And it changes the DNA readout by changing the biochemical. It's not the DNA itself that's changing, but the way that the DNA is translated into RNA and then to protein. So that's been a real learning curve for me in terms of understanding the direct acquisition of information from the environment, which is 180 degrees out of sync with Darwinism. Darwinism is really an epiphenomenon. It's just describing a reproductive strategy, whereas what's actually happening is this internal selection for structure and function through these epigenetic mechanisms. And so I actually have considered the real possibility. So what I've done is I've worked my way back from complicated physiologic structures like the alveolus of the lung, glomerulus of the kidney, bone, skin, brain, all the way back, all of these physiologic traits can be traced all the way back to the unicellular state. And in fact, I think that the way that epigenetics functions in a way where the developing organism is informed of the oncoming change or changes in the environment, it's kind of like insider trading is giving a heads up to the organism that there's change that has to be adapted to. So basically what I think is actually happening is we don't go from adult to adult, we go from zygote to zygote through the epigenetic mechanism. And so it's a very different paradigm in terms of understanding the way in which we have it essentially adapted to an ever changing environment. The universe is constantly expanding, our environment is changing, and we in turn as organisms have the responsibility, if you will, to perpetuate the species by changing as a consequence of all of that in a way which is commensurate with what actually is occurring in the environment. Did that? Nice. Yeah, covered so much ground there. Cool. So let's cover some topics together. And let's start with you listed symbiogenesis. So Lynn Margolis and also just in general, from an a biogenesis standpoint, this feels like one of the most crucial moments for consciousness to sort of look at its source on its home planet and to reflect on the unity of itself. And so the symbiogenesis component of again taking different parts of cellular evolution and then merging them into the most recent example of what we've evolved to these 30 trillion cell organisms. I love reflecting back at that source point of this Earth's proliferation of life because it makes unity a no brainer. It makes oneness a no brainer. And I feel like that is such a crucial way of perceiving science and spirituality merging as one thing. So I'd be curious to hear your take on that first, how we can basically use a biogenesis and cellular proliferation, life proliferation as a no brainer for us to understand unity. I did a critical experiment about 25 years ago in which I had been funded by the NIH to study a specific hormonal mediator of development, parathyroid hormone-related protein. And it's an interesting molecule because it's regulated by the distension of the cell. When you distend a long cell, a bone cell, a skin cell that expresses this gene, it increases the expression of this gene. If you delete it, you don't get alveoli in the lung, you don't get glomerular formation, skin formation. It's critically important. And in fact, it was critically, it was critical for the transition from water to land about 500 million years ago. And I thought to myself, well, this sounds like a gravitational effect. So I beg, borrowed, bummed this contraption that NASA has approved in a Houston aerospace spin-off company that makes this device in which you can put cells on cephidex beads that have a certain buoyancy, and you put them into this contraption with culture medium in it, you put it in a centrifuge, then you spin it, and you're emulating microgravity. And in that condition, lung and bone cells show a dramatic decrease over about an eight-hour period in the mRNA production of this PTHRP gene. You put it back into unit gravity, these cells then might become normalized again. So it showed that it wasn't that the cells were dying, they just were reacting to a microgravity. And in the same paper, I actually got some bones from rats that have been flown in deep space, and you see the same thing. Aspenauts suffer from osteoporosis for this very reason, because there's loss of tension on the bone, and that causes a loss of that PTHRP mRNA expression in the bone, and that's why astronauts develop osteoporosis, for example. But the point I'm trying to make is that gravity as one of the four forces generated by the Big Bang, or what theoretically was the Big Bang, is essential for life. It's also been considered to be essential for planetary formation. So now you have the same force determining planetary formation and the inhabitation of those planets by living organisms. So there's a conciliance there of the two processes. Obviously, life came after the planetary formation by several hundred million years, but still in all the same gravitational principle was there. And so that's where I think the unitary aspect of this, the singularity of this mechanism comes from, is through this common mechanism of gravity affecting both non-life or abiogenic forms and biogenic forms as well. Beautiful. Yes. And I've also been adamant about sharing that the bounding function in cosmology is a critical component to life evolving and developing and reflecting, becoming self-aware and reflecting on itself. So meaning gravity or these bounding functions, so rocks, planets, orbiting stars that are bounded by gravity so that basically the map, you could say, is limited, not actually, but gravitationally speaking creates a massive limit so that way there's only a certain amount of land on the planet that can be explored. It makes it so that the conscious agents, you and I plus our audience, that they must interact with each other because of this bounding function. So if the map of the land was unlimited to start, then there wouldn't be as much of a pressure cooker or a forcing function for the agents to interact with each other. So that plays another big role in gravity, not only on the cellular development, like you indicated, but also as a bounding function for the agents to actually need to interact with themselves. So that, and going even deeper, because the way I had gotten back to the unicellular state and that question about gravity was basically looking at emergent properties in the reverse direction in the process of physiologic evolution and saying, okay, this event occurred, what were the precursors of that? Because that's the way this works. There are precursors which exist and then they're utilized by the organism, not consciously, but unconsciously to address emergent. And so the question arose as to where symbiogenesis came from, and I thought to myself, well, so I know that based upon Einstein's field theory that if gravity impinges on a curved surface, it produces energy. So that would have explained how, so I'm trying to understand the quantum mechanical principle and say, okay, so that's where the energy for quantum entanglement occurred in those protocells to give rise to symbiogenesis as this process of taking stuff from the environment and utilizing it to self-benefit. And it also encapsulates both the local effect of gravity on the protocell itself and also the non-local reference to the gravity in the cosmos. So you have this local non-local relationship and that in turn references quantum mechanics, which everyone acknowledges has to be at the basis of both physics and biology. But no one's ever really been able to determine how the quantum mechanical aspect of biology has come about because they've only looked at it from a synchronic perspective. I'm talking about a diachronic approach. And I do think that that's important because that then creates a level playing field for everything we talk about. And in fact, I went one step further and said, okay, so where did the quantum mechanics come from? And that's referencing the particulate nature of the aftermath of the Big Bang. And so my thought has been, if in fact the Big Bang is a correctoid, it may not be absolute, but something a cataclysmic event did occur. That in fact, no one's ever suggested that, well, there must have been based upon Newton's third law of motion, an equal and opposite reaction. That's where homeostasis comes from. That's the equal sign in every balanced equation, physics, chemistry, and biology alike. And homeostasis is essential for biology and for all water processes because that's the only way you get matter. You wouldn't have matter in the cosmos if you didn't have that reverse reaction to that eruptive process. And homeostasis is critical, as we both know, for the physiology of the cell and above. So that's how it all comes together, including the quantum mechanics and the physics. I'm sorry. So you have that interface between the quantum mechanics and the classic Newtonian mechanics, which is always, it's referred to as, there's a term for it where you have this, you know, people question how you can have an interface between quantum mechanical properties and the messy Newtonian mechanics. Well, it's through biology. I think that biology is really the initiation of everything that we experience. Prior to the existence of life, the formation of this topologic structure, it was all, you know, what Bohm called the implicate order. It was just, you know, this infinite space without any meaning. It's only once life occurred that it conferred the, you know, Bohm's explicit order, meaning to the existence of everything, including the non and nonbiologic, I would submit. I don't know if that makes sense, but I think of context. For example, I think that we normally think of mathematics and physics as being innate, but Husserl published a paper on the origin of geometry in which he said it's not innate. We express it onto a piece of paper and make nice drawings and then we internalize it, but it actually exists in the cosmos. It doesn't exist within us. And so that's that nonlocalization kind of idea. And I think that math, physics, and maybe even the arts exist in the cosmos, and we just referenced them through our physiology, which is kind of a somewhat metaphysical, well, it's a very metaphysical idea, but I think it helps me to understand. So, for example, the cellular communication principles of physiology are what I wrote a paper on that being the origin of language. Language comes to us very naturally. Children do it, you know, they develop the ability to express themselves through language and then print language, et cetera, et cetera, quite naturally. Mathematics is much more difficult. And I think it's because it's not innate. You see what I'm saying? It's outside of us. And so there are people who are good practitioners and they get it, but it's not part of our innate understanding of who we are. Mathematics is an abstraction. So anyway, I'm just trying to suggest ways in which this model actually circumscribes a lot of things that we haven't understood up until now, in a way which is holistic and not having to use different principles at different levels and, you know, sort of make stuff up. It's not made up. This is all mechanistically interdigitated and interdependent. Yeah. Okay. So. Totally. Yeah. The interdependence is something that I feel very much is a cornerstone to us understanding unity and oneness and also the like one of the best ways for us to recognize that everything has a string that is endless of how it came to rise. So not only us as individuals have this endless string of ancestry that gave rise to us, this great chain of being, but even the little strawberry that you eat has this great chain behind it of how it came to be and of just an insane amount of interdependence. And so that's a good way to be able to recognize oneness, unity. There's so many other great things that you've shared that I would like to for us as best as we can to address. So yeah. So one of them was the the lattice work of the cosmos. So the macro and the lattice work of physiology. So the micro are the same. So go ahead and unpack that a little more for us. So when I talk about the lattice work of the cosmos. So when a star generates light, starlight, it actually produces matter. And it produces matter the first 36 elements of the periodic table in a sequence consistent with the atomic mass. So it's consistent with the periodic table. And that's important because for years I tried to find a at least an analogy if not a homology of the same origin for evolution. And then it struck me. I became friends with a well known chemistry professor who's written several books on the periodic table. And so what you see in the both evolution and in the periodic table is you have both the synchronic and the diachronic processes at right angles to one of them literally. So and what happens when that when that occurs according to highly a student of bones who wrote a paper in 1984 with Friskura is when you have two harmonic processes that are at right angles to one another. They generate cyclicity. So that's what's happening in the so the periodic table of elements is both synchronic in the sense that it's like the alchemical physical characteristics of the elements. But it also references the big bang because it's also the atomic mass of those elements. In the same way that ontogeny development and phylogeny is the same thing. They're they're those short term and long term history of the organism. But then when you reduce both to the cellular signaling mechanisms that I described, you can superimpose one on the other freely and you get a wave collapse as in quantum mechanics. And so there too you see that the imposing of the ontogeny or regressing the ontogeny against the phylogeny at right angles gives you the cyclicity of the life cycle. And that in turn is in tandem with the vector of the big bang. And I think that the closer we approximate that vector, the more smoothly the life form exists in space and time. I think that that's the part of life is the problem solving of trying to move ever closer to that asthmatode. Because you never reach it. You're never going to be in the implicate order. Perhaps until you die. Maybe when death is represented by merging with the implicate order. I don't know. That's not scientific for me any longer. I stipulate that everything I say, everything I've said is based upon experimental evidence. And I'll stick to that because that's the only way that I can really understand. I can differentiate between inductive and deductive reasoning. Okay, so yeah. Well, so I also want to explore this together that we are energy. You said that earlier. And that that was Alfred Whitehead's. And that obviously that's also very deeply rooted in many of the mystic traditions as well. So why don't we go ahead and play on that also? So if it is in fact the case that this is energy with itself, can that simply be a way to describe what the universe is? I would say yes. I mean the place I'm at from a reductionist understanding of what's going on. I've gotten as close as recognizing this unicellular state in juxtaposition to the singularity that is thought to have existed before the Big Bank. But the question is what is that relationship? I think it's like the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland. The cell is running as fast as it can to remain an equapoise. And its reference point is the singularity. But in saying so, I would say yeah, that's all about energy, right? The energy of maintaining equapoise referencing the parent structure of the cosmos. So yes, it's all about energy. Yes, it is all about energy and how energy is presented in a way where you can continue that vectorial magnitude and direction of change that was generated by the Big Bank. Mm-hmm. Right. Mm-hmm. Yeah, there's several other threads. I feel like pulling on this one a little bit more. So it does seem to make most sense to then speak of biology as a, like you described a sort of like interface or medium, we could say. Four, you could look at it a couple ways. One of them is for quantum mechanics and Newtonian mechanics. You could also look at it from a homeostatic angle as well. So similar with the polarities that are in a rhythmic, balanced interchange of sorts. So not only with the simplicity of the blood sugar homeostasis, but also with things like the male and female polarities on planet Earth. Another just simple examples of this. So then, so I really like how biology can be seen as like also the vehicle for life to express itself or for whatever the big, big bang is, call that God or the one or infinity or whatever you want to call it for it to use biology to explore itself, to express itself. How do you feel about that? Yeah, the closest, I hear what you're saying. I think the closest I've come in this context is, I guess it's like proof of principle that consciousness does exist. It's an expression of consciousness. Without the living life form, I think it's less obvious that consciousness constitutes the cosmos. But once you have a life form expressing consciousness, then it's unequivocal. I guess that's what I would say. So the way that I put this together in terms of the configuration of life itself. So it's well known that lipids are produced by pulsars. The Earth, the primordial Earth was covered with water that was produced by these snowball-like asteroids that delivered ice to the surface of the Earth before it had an oxidative atmosphere. And there were lipids in those asteroids as well. We know that for a fact. And so when you have gravity impinging on, so lipids are interesting molecules because they're amphiphiles. They have a positive and a negative charge on either end. And so when gravity impinges on those lipids floating at the surface of the water, they'll cause them to stand perpendicular to the surface of the water with a negative charge downward because it's hydrophilic and the positive charge charged end pointing upwards. And when they pack together, they have the property of reducing the van der Waals forces, these weak forces that cause surface tension. And once you have enough of those lipids packed together, you get the formation of micelles or liposomes. It's what they use to deliver the mRNA for the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccine, for example. So it's a commonly used method in a biochemistry lab. You wet and dry these lipids in a test tube and boom, you get these protosellular semi-permeable membrane structures. But the point I'm trying to make is that that then offered the opportunity for things to happen within that protected space, within that semi-permeable membrane. And I've posited that that's where the first principles of physiology emulate from Schrodinger's negative entropy, chemiosmosis as a way to maintain that negative entropic state because otherwise it will just the energy will just dissipate. And the third property is homeostasis. When you put those three components together in association with the protosell, that's the beginnings of life. But it's also the beginning of consciousness in the way we understand it. So again, I would go back. The best I can do is because it's not an easy thing to understand that relationship between our human consciousness and the consciousness of the cosmos, other than to think that we're just exemplars. We are the manifestation, the organic manifestation of the same thing that the cosmos is constituted by. It's the one, right? I guess in terms of the mystics. But it is a unity. And I published a paper on the singularity of the cosmos. I do think there is a singularity, not not Kurzweil's technical singularity, but the singularity that the Greeks talked about 500 years ago. Yeah. Right. Heraclitus, I guess. Yeah. Right. So we intuitively understand this. I only and I've had discussions with Buddhists when I lived in Los Angeles, so no longer live there. I live in on the East Coast, trying to make fine common ground with Buddhism, because we're talking about the same thing. They don't require my science. They already understand all of this. However, I think it's beneficial to understand the underlying principles from a rational standpoint, because then it connects the dots with other humanistic aspects of our lives in a more, in a more rational kind of way, rather than just believe in it. It's like Christian Murti when he says to David Bowen and Bowen in 1984 at Brockwood. Well, the only way you can connect with the cosmic consciousness is to relinquish your ego. Ego is matter. He was telling Bowen, yeah, you've got to relinquish matter in order to get to that energetic state of the cosmos. Bowen didn't come back with his scientific sort of comeback, which was surprising to me, but I think there is one. And I don't mean to be insulting to people's beliefs, but I do think there's, obviously there's a fundamental difference between believing and providing experimental rationale that you can then further test for predictive purposes. So as a scientist, I prefer the scientific approach as opposed to just merely believing we're not believing. I think it brings more people in the tent, or people like me would come into the tent for sure. Yeah. Yeah, this is exactly why I'm so passionate about the synthesis of science and spirituality is because they, you have an earth that has went through a long period of evolution and now the emergence of self-awareness to be able to reflect on its source on what it is and why it's here. And at this exact point is when there's sort of a a split where you have one side that's super interested in consciousness and the subjective and in how that is God and how that is the one. And on the other side, you have this focus on materialism or physicalism and trying to dig into the most particles. But you can't understand the particles without understanding the whole, but it's also really important to see, well, why are we creating separation? Why are we creating a duality between consciousness and physicalism or science and spirituality when ultimately they're one? And so you can actually bring more people as earth wakes up to what it truly is. We can actually, like you said, bring more people into the tent by merging science with spirituality. So by coming at consciousness from a scientific angle, so meaning like another way to say this coming at infinity from a explanation of what it is from a scientific or finite angle. So basically, I mean, there's so many ways to take this, but what are you doing? Well, I'm with you for what it's worth. There's so many ways to take it. Yeah. If you have an infinity, which is what this is, then it would never come to the end of exploring itself. Never. It's impossible to come to the end of exploring infinity. So just most simply or logically put, you can't come to the end of exploring yourself. You will try endless combinations of possibilities to explore yourself. And in all different types of ways, especially in ways like in this case with this universe, let's say or with especially this earth is we fall asleep to an extent to separation. And so we think we're separate from that infinity from that one from God. And so then we develop a whole story, a whole narrative around being separate. And so rather than associating ourselves or identifying ourselves as God or the one or infinity, we identify ourselves as a finite, separate biological creature, which we are at the same time. So I as infinity will never die, but this specific individuated piece of life is mortal and is going to pass. And so there's a simultaneity that is then recognized that is very important for sort of like just dropping the veil and remembering what you are, and then sort of circling it back to the simultaneity of it. So that's that's one way to put it as you go sort of all the way to your source. And then you include the you could say the body or the limitation at the same time. So you are both something that is infinite and has no limits. And yet at the same time is appearing as something finite with a limit. And so it's a beautiful way to be able to hold it all at the same time and not get lost in one of those. There are some key elements that I might mention here in the context of what you just said. I fully agree with what you said. I think that we we've gotten ourselves into the situation for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that we began in an ambiguous state of negative entropy within the cell. That's what the life force really is, at least, you know, the Schrodinger approach. And ever since then we've been making up these myths and stories to cope with our ambiguity. That's why we can understand uncertainty principle, for example, we wouldn't be able to accept that if it weren't for the fact that we are of an ambiguous origin. However, we are now at a state of inflection point where we do have enough data to no longer have to reason after the fact. We can now look in the forward direction and we can see the predictive elements of all that we've experienced in a way where we can truly understand who and what and why we are. That's important. If we are willing, you know, and the big bugaboo is we're all survivors, right? So we cop this attitude. Well, you know, I got here, I'm okay, dude. So, you know, leave me alone. But that's not, but that's not really what the issue is with the issue is, why is it that there is this collective consciousness? Why is it that there is a synchronicity? I fully believe in young synchronicity. For all the reasons I've been talking about, it exists. We just have to be able to have the capacity to sense it and to react to it, be open to it when it occurs, because it does happen. It happens to my wife and I, we've been together for 60 years, fairly frequently. And I don't think it's not causal. It's just a reflection of the holistic aspect of our existence. There's something else I was going to say in this context, blanking on it. But yeah, I think that the time has come for us to really, not unlike the removal of the earth from the center of the solar system, who those centrism, we have to remove ourselves in the center of the biosphere, we have to get over ourselves. Every organism is conscious. It's just how they've adapted to the niche that they're in. And so we have to understand that we've been given this gift, if you will, of higher consciousness, if you want to call it that, the ability. So in the last paper I published on the Mobius nature of the cell membrane, that's what I was trying to explain is that, so the normal way we think of the cell membrane is this binary decision-making process of in or out of the cell, for example. However, in the emergent way of looking at the evolution of the protocell, the cell, because of that lipid membrane having hysteresis, the ability when this, you know, in its very origins, having these liposomes floating at the surface of the water being heated by day by the sun and deforming and then reforming at night when things cooled off, that's hysteresis. And what that did was expansion and contraction trapped calcium, primarily calcium ions within that space. And then our forebears figured out how to move calcium in and out actively through calcium channels. That's where memory actually originates from. It's not DNA. DNA nucleotides are all over the place in the cosmos. It's the cell membrane, which is the actual determinant of life. And once you violate that cell membrane, you're not talking about biology anymore. It's overly reductions. And that's a huge mistake that would make, in my opinion. Jack Schostack, the Nobelist at Mass General, has shown that in a test tube, lipids can synthesize nucleotides. Nucleotides cannot synthesize lipids, for example. So in terms of the hierarchical relationships, lipids came first. The, you know, lipid world was the origins of life. But I'm getting ahead of myself. So what I'm trying to say is, oh, and so this idea of how the cell actually is cognizant of its existence prior to being a cell as these lipid molecules is where I get this idea of the Mobius Strip. It's not a literal Mobius Strip in the sense that you have a piece of paper and you form a circle with a piece of paper and then cut through it and then you twist the end. And now it has either inside or outside. It's not a literal Mobius Strip. It's a figurative Mobius Strip in which the cell has no inside or outside. It's open to the cosmos. And that's where our imagination comes from. And I think that's unique to humans. And I don't need to go, if you want, I can go through the rationale. I wrote a paper about the evolution of the central nervous system and how that emerged from largely from standing on two legs, being bipedal, freeing our forelimbs, putting this huge selection pressure on the central nervous system, then generated through toolmaking, language and toolmaking, language being a tool, the capacity to communicate as a derivative of the cellular communication properties. It's a continuum. So imagination is really the key to what distinguishes humans from other life forms. We can imagine being in outer space and we've done it clearly. And we've lived in all kinds of environments. But that also puts us into Bateson's double bind because we get into situations where we're in environments where we shouldn't be. And then we get into trouble. So that's maladaptive. Those kinds of things don't happen with other organisms. They know their place. They know they're niche. And so they don't experience those kinds of stresses we do. So basically by standing on two legs, having the ability to text and to make spears and all that other good stuff, that puts us at risk. But at the same time, it's what enables us as risk takers and with imagination to do the kinds of things we do, particularly the formation of social systems and culture and the ability to form printed words so that you can exchange information from one generation to the next. That codifies all of our behaviors, right? That's radically different from any other species. So yeah. Yeah. Yeah, that's... So as long as our brains got evolved and got bigger and bigger, they got too big to get through the birth canal. So as a consequence, we're born at about 25% of adult brain volume. So it takes us these two decades, if some people never mature, at least two decades of protection by the family, extended family society, in order to mature our brains. And so basically, you know, Google said we're naked apes. We are. We have this area of roca in the cerebrum, which determines both toolmaking and language. And the difference between us and other great apes is we can... We naturally stand on two legs. But that also generates all these psychoses and neuroses. So, you know, it's a double-edged sword. But I do think my message has been that we have to recognize that once we've virtually eliminated theology in our lives, formal religious practices, who else is going to step up? We have to. But we're these immature, juvenile, great apes. And we don't want to accept that responsibility. The reason that I go out on the hustings and I talk to people like you, while I write books and papers, is to make people realize that we're responsible for ourselves. We have to step up. Or, you know, we're toast, in my opinion. So yeah, didn't want to sound preachy, but I do think that that's true. Yeah, I love how we can see in the emergence of the one how using cells, and I love the recursive aspect of cells and how they can then be a vehicle for self-awareness. And then I love how that then, like you shared, we then use especially communication to be able to share information about what we are, that like symbol exchange between conscious agents, if you will, and how like now, more than ever, there's a, we could say, a mass of our conscious agents in this collective that want to know themselves, they want to know who they are, and they want to wake up out of separation, and they want to wake up to unity, and they want to have all basic needs be met, they want to be able to be free and to be playful and to be artistic and entrepreneurial and scientific and expressive. And that is screaming so loudly right now in contrast to much of the matrix, which keeps many people in cycles of unconsciousness. And so there's like this growing liberation from that unconsciousness, and it feels fantastic catalyzing that, igniting that, and it really, and you use the word imagination and imagination being so critical as almost a pinnacle, if we could say, of emergence itself. And that's totally resonates because imagination, in a sense, is in a feedback loop with physical. And so the more that we imagine and we occupy, you could say, an imaginative state of this podcast is going to go fantastic, that I'm already living in the frequency we could say in the imagination of Shambhala, which is like this whole planet being an awake and prosperous spiritual kingdom, something along those lines. And so then my imagination, like occupying that state, very similar, you could say to the Wright Brothers occupying the imaginative state of the airplane itself. And then that coming into manifestation, Henry Ford occupying the imaginative state of the car, that coming into manifestation. Elon Musk occupying the imaginative state of electric vehicles, space rockets that coming into imagination reusable. All of that, it comes from occupying the state in the imagination first, and basically holding 2035 in 2022 consciousness, you could say. And then people coming into that vision and wanting to support that and nourish that and execute it. And so I love I love how you brought that focus of imagination. And I love how you also kind of created a nice analogy or metaphor for us, or even just the comparison, which is between the universe and the cell. And I find that to be one of the most beautiful macro microcosms possible because the use that neg entropy. So it's order, we could say, so entropy being disorder, so neg entropy being order or like emergence of sorts. So the Big Bang and the exploration that is the universe as well as the cell and the exploration of the intracellular components and then the recursiveness into multiple cells and then their further exploration and differentiation as well. And the just that whole like fractal like nature of them as well as of of the universe itself and how it does generate into like a pinnacle of order of emergence, which is self awareness reflecting on itself. And it's just like, it's just so rich and nourishing just feeling into that and recognizing that we are that and that like when you begin when one begins associating their identity with this like recursive nature of the cells and with this fractal like exploration of the universe, it kind of like shatters all limits, it shatters all like beliefs and assumptions about oneself being so limited and so and so contracted and so things like unworthy. You know, that's one of the biggest ones is feeling like one's unworthy or that one is unholy in some way or and then all of the compensation mechanisms come, then they fight for that worthiness or they fight for the validation of fight for that wholeness. And so when you can shatter these limits, does it make one feel so expansive and it makes one feel so much more free and so much more air like and then it that's really what drives you could say emptiness and pure service because then you're when you talk to somebody else, you're not there to get something from them, but you're there because you know that it's the one with itself or God with itself and that they're asking for something, it's you asking for something from yourself which is typically something like how do I be more free or how do I end my seeking or how do I be more happy or more peaceful and then you're just replying to yourself without wanting to get anything out of it and then that's how this collective wakes up. I fully agree. I wrote a paper, so normally if you think yes, like we normally think of phenotype as a collection of biologic traits, that's not what it is. The phenotype in the epigenetic context is agency and so a lot of our human foibles are our bastardizations I guess is the best I can do of these looking for these looking for novelty in the environment, changes in small subtle changes in the environment, but that's what leads us to over reading because bigger is better in the wild in the wild because you're less likely to get eaten for example or a lot of our behaviors are really exaggerations of the normal processes that wild animals do it naturally. They're content with their lot. We're not and as you were saying we feel unworthy because we're not recognizing we're looking at the wrong horizon, we're looking at the wrong set of principles, we're looking at matter instead of energy. What is going to maximally facilitate the flow of energy between me and my environment? That's what you really want to look at but we're not equipped to do that when we are but not in the same way that we are we can measure ourselves as material beings. That's far simpler and far easier but it's wrong in my opinion. One of the great tragedies in my opinion is that both biology and physics have concluded that we're here by chance. We're not. That's the consequence of overly reductionist thinking. Reality is wrote a paper about the homology between the cell and the atom. They both exist simultaneously in a deterministic and a probabilistic state and we exist along that line of identity in some way. It's not probabilistic or deterministic. It's both which makes far more sense to me. I said it's the homostatic balance in hydrogen atom between the electron and the proton. Poly exclusion principle determining electron spin of the four spin determinants. The first three are deterministic. The fourth is time-based and probabilistic for example. In the cell it's the first principles of physiology and homeostasis. So negentrically and chemoesmosis are deterministic. Homostasis is probabilistic. It's the same thing. The atom is patterning itself on the atom. They are one and the same. They are fractals. One of the physical and the other of the biology. I find it freeing and enabling to think in these terms because it lets me understand far better who and what I am after eight decades. You're always in danger of falling in love with your own ideas. But I came to them through empiricism and not through deductive reasoning. So I guess I hang my head on that and I would entertain your responses. But the cell is a fractal. The atom is a fractal. Once we recognize the fractal relationships, I think we're far further down that road to self-awareness and self-understanding. And what's the word I'm looking for? Mindfulness I think comes much more naturally once you realize these relationships. They don't have to be taught anymore. They just come naturally because it's how we roll or we can. If only we were to relinquish our narcissistic way of thinking about our existence and move further into a I mean, the whole idea of, you know, the tangled, you know, Darwin's tangled bank that it's all about competition is totally wrong. That's a subset of the actual life process. The actual life process is cooperative. It's how cells have cooperated metabolically in order to give rise to higher, you know, higher, to more complicated physiologic forms, not competition. Competition is cancer in biologic terms. So of course it's wrong and it's dangerous and we've fallen into that trap. So yeah. Yeah, I love how you say both probabilistic and deterministic. Again, it just speaks to the simultaneity is so important, like we talked about infinite and finite or God and human. And I love how you talked about fractals and I love how when we begin sort of investigating the like the fractal like nature of reality, we begin sort of identifying ourselves as that more. And one of the core aspects of fractals is that they're recursive. And so when there's this, there's this the self similar creation, it brings home a sense of I am that like I am all of this undergoing this process. And it makes it makes one feel more home it makes one feel more at ease in their heart or like you said that it makes you feel more free it makes you feel like every time that you're doing something artistically that you're expressing yourself, whether it's a paper or music or however people express themselves that it is in line with that truth, and that it's serving itself waking up to that to that truth. Another thing that I think is really important that you're mentioning I mean you talked about this a little bit. And I know that there's like, you know, several decades for you of experience at UCLA. And just in general with like one of the examples you were giving with epigenetics was the change of DNA expression for smoking parents on on their children. And then you mentioned like zygote to zygote and I thought that was really interesting because I've always felt like the Big Bang is like an analogy to a zygote. And so I would like to ask when you do tune into that like that understanding of like zygote to zygote, instead of like adult to adult, like the recursive process is less like adult to adult as it is like zygote to zygote. Like why zygote to zygote, why that very first like inception of the sperm and the egg and the formation of the DNA itself, like at that point, the probability space of you or I was infinite at that point. And then over time, more and more, the infinite possibilities became less and less. Because we're ossifying our path, we're carving our path more and more in our trajectory. So why specifically zygote to zygote, not only from an epigenetic perspective, but also from a metaphysical perspective. For the, there are two reasons I prefer the zygote to zygote kind of way of thinking, because the zygote is more consistent with the singularity than the reproductive strategy of sexual reproduction. And empirically, Gregory Pankas, the person who developed the pill, published a couple of papers back in the late 40s in which he showed that you can actually cause parthenogenesis by extracting an oocyte from a rabbit through the tricks that are used. And then you can just physically probe that egg, if you will, without fertilization, put it back into the rabbit and prime it with hormones. So it will ingestate and you'll get offspring, which he then showed were referral. So he demonstrated that it's not so much egg and sperm, it's just the physical disturbance of the egg, which causes this flash of light caused by zinc, if you will, and the disturbance of the energy state of the oocyte. So it's really all about the unicellular state, all that other stuff that we think about in terms of male-female and life cycle. And to me, I guess the reason I started thinking this way was because I thought, well, a mayfly lives only 24 hours, a great sequoia lives 5,000 years. It's just two different strategies for collecting information from the environment. The reality is it's really trying to remain at equipoise, not to change as best you can, and that these strategies of epigenetic inheritance are all about that. But one other thing I wanted to throw in was that I find it fascinating, well, not so much fascinating, but intriguing that so we're due to our stones, right? We develop from our anus to our mouth, as opposed to proteostome. So you develop from mouth to anus, which is the way you would normally think things would go, but that's not how we evolved. And so we're moving away from the source of gravity by developing from anus to mouth. And that's reinforced by the vagal nerve, which runs basically from your adrenals through your gut, to your heart, to your the 10th nerve of the cranial nerve, to your face, to your brain, okay? The vagal nerve is actually the neurologic reinforcement of that movement away from gravity. And I think that that fosters the left-right brain, which then is what actually makes the determination of the transition from the Newtonian experience of the organism to the quantum mechanical. The difference between the left-right is actually the remainder of that in a mathematical sense, is quantum mechanical. So I think that there are certain these deliverables. I love the opinion that our physiology is not merely how we are structured, it's actually acting like a lodestone to the cosmos. And these are deliverables in terms of understanding. So Belushka, a friend of mine who's a German botanist, has shown the opposite for plants. Their roots are where their brains are. They orient downward in a positive gravatropic response when we react in the opposite direction. So there's a fundamental difference in the way that plants and animals react to gravity, for example. And that there are these fundamental differences, but that the ultimate result is this ability to exist in a very robust environment and do it successfully. So I just wanted to throw that in there because I think it's important in terms of another bite at the apple in terms of understanding that physiology is more than a mere vessel for perambulating around the earth and having fun. It's actually the process by which we obtain information and that we have transitioned away from the primary principles involved and moved into this other realm of enjoyment as the primary motivation, which is understandable, but it's not really, you know, it works after a fashion, but it's coming back to destroy us because we don't understand the relationships between body and soul and spirit. In that Mobius Strip paper, I actually suggested that now there are these two-tiered, it's a two-tiered system. You have the binary of the explicate order and you have the implicate order in the cellular mechanisms of physiology and that every time you make decisions, we're in that space between the binary decisions and the more holistic decisions relevant to the non-local cosmos. And so I think that what we need to strive for is to be as able to do that freely and openly and honestly and authentically as we possibly can, because otherwise we just create this pseudo existence which is a faux existence and it's not really, it's not productive, it doesn't make us happy, it doesn't make us, you know, feel good about ourselves, as we were saying earlier, we feel like we're lost by and large because we don't understand the purpose of life. I think I've provided a rationale for that, at least at a certain level. And in fact, I wrote a paper about how you cannot understand history without understanding evolution, they are intimately related, so now you have a pairing of, you know, CP snows two cultures, now they come together, the humanities and the sciences come back together, which they must. We've sucked the humanity out of science and in so doing we've created this evil genie kind of thing because it destroys the humanistic aspect of what we're trying to do. It's interesting that when you share zygote to zygote that there's so many things that come up that there's like the difference between an organism that only lives for 24 hours, there's like such a brief just spark, and then there's the organism that lives for let's say 80 years like a human, and then there's the organism that lives for thousands of years like sequoia tree. And I feel like that's such an interesting component like just the refraction of how a cell can express itself in so many different ways. And then also I like how you share that like physiology is like a lodestone, I think that's really interesting. So basically like the one uses physiology to be able to like understand the realities that it generates, to like comprehend the realities that it generates. So it's like a magnet. It's like the, yeah, I mean it's so interesting like the generation of a physical reality that is then comprehended by agents within that reality, but that are not separate from it. And so it's still all one electromagnetic singularity dancing with itself, talking to itself, being with itself. And I like how physiology is like the, it's like the, yeah, the medium for it to be able to like be alive, like within itself as itself. And yeah, and that's just that's just a really exciting like realization about biology and about physiology because it's not a, it's not even like so many scientists that I know that are so brilliant that spend so much of their time in their lab. They're not investigating the instrument that is investigating the cell, right. So if to investigate the instrument that's investigating the self, you have to know the knower of the experience first. And by doing that, then you can actually have a better relationship also with what you're investigating. I mean, there's so many ways to pull that, but that, that was an interesting component. I like how you talk about epigenetics as the very like strategies themselves. I think that's interesting. I used to like recognize it as like a couple tiered, like a genetics, a, the, the, like the transcriptomics, so like the begin, like the expression, the proteomics, protein generation and the metabolomics. And then even like the exposomics, so like the way that the genes are exposed to the environment on our in a feedback loop with the environment changing the way that it's transcribed and expresses itself. And so then so you call that entire loop epigenetics. Is that right? Yeah. So just to be clear, I mean, I pondered how the environment, I knew that stress had to do at something to do with evolution for many reasons. And I pondered that for years and all of a sudden I realized that, well, when you put stress, it's a little more in less obvious in a unicellular organism, but once you have the ability to respond to stress, which are all organisms do, it's known that the cells will generate the other sense of disturbance and they'll cause a dyshomia stasis. And in so doing, the cells will produce these radical oxygen species as a consequence. And those are known to cause mutations, gene mutations and duplication. Thank you. And in the process, it's, they will remodel this, the, that, that structure that's experiencing that stress, and the dyshomia stasis will remodel until it reaches a new homostatic set point. That's evolution. But we don't see it because it's, so Neil Shubin's Tectolic, for example, yeah, we all recognize that that's the origin of, or thought to be the origin of quadrupeds as they emerged from water onto land. But nobody asked the question, well, what's happening to the internal organs? How do you explain that? I've just explained that. And that's very important in terms of that differential between, you know, the Darwinian description of evolution and what I'm talking about, which is a deeply mechanistic way of understanding the nature of response to stress, physiological environmental stress translated into physiologic stress. And how does that, you know, play out as a change in structure and function consistent with a, with a reestablishment of the homeostatics or the equipoise between the organism and its environment. And you can, it's demonstrable. There were three gene duplications that occurred during the transition from water to land 500 million years ago. All three of them are gene, are genes for hormone receptors. And all three of them are essential for the adaptation, terrestrial adaptation of water, you know, bony fish to become amphibians, reptiles, mammals and birds. It's been shown both in terms of gene deletions, overexpression, all kinds of manipulations have pointed to that. And so that's an object lesson in how important the, the, the antecedents of that, what led up to that event, and then how did it play out in terms of adaptation to land? We know that it occurred. It's been documented that the attempt to get from water to land occurred at least five times. What was happening during that period of time, you know, it was millions of years. It was trial and error was empiric. And how does that play out in the way that I just described? So it's a known phenomenon, but to me, it's fascinating that nobody's put together a Margulis symbiogenesis with these ideas until I rolled around. And, you know, it just, because I was trying to write a review article about how the Oveolar wall of a long evolved. And then I realized, well, it took these two simple germline cells, a mesodermal cell and an endodermal cell, to interact to form 40 different cell types. Either that happened by chance, which is Fugriama's neutral hypothesis, or there was something deeply, some underlying principle or principles involved. And when I did the mathematics, and I tested whether it was chance or deterministic in a sense of, you know, it would have taken longer than the existence of the cosmos for that to have happened by chance. So the default mode is something else was happening here. And that's when I started to dig deeper and deeper into the lineage of cells that, you know, gave rise to the lung from the swim bladder of fish and working backwards. I'm getting too detailed about it. But what I'm saying is, the second book that we published, evolution, the logic of biology, that finally is a logic. And I think it's very important. It's no longer anecdote. Biology is no longer a soft science. It's a predictive science. And I think that has to be recognized. Sorry. Sorry about that. Yeah. So I hope that, you know, made sense. But but I mean, the evidence is is there. It's just a matter of how you organize it. It's kind of like, you know, you've got this, you've got, you know, this jigsaw puzzle. And then the question is, well, how do you assemble the pieces in a way which is consonant with what we do know? And people haven't done that. I think largely again, because of this failure to look at the deep disynchronic aspect of biology. And I have to say that what I was going to say is that they've been handcuffed because Darwinian evolution, as you well know, is based upon random mutation. I could never have traced the lineage from the alveolar structure to the unicell. If in fact, it were evolution were a series of random mutations, I would have hit blind alley after blind alley. But that wasn't the case. I was able to find that pathway by looking at environmental, geochemical and geophysical changes and how they gave rise to these structures associated with these structural changes. And what were the cellular underpinnings of that? That's how it worked and does work. But people are, you know, I get all kinds of, I've tried to publish in the evolution literature and they think I'm crazy, you know, because I'm going against Darwinian principles and they're scared to death. If they don't adhere to Darwin, then the creationists are going to eat our lunch. And I think that that's a failure of imagination. It's really a true scientific failure of responsibility to try and think of other possible modalities. But, you know, it's what put, you know, people have to put food on the table. I'm retired. I don't have to worry about, you know, not having funding anymore. Those pressures are long gone. But so I understand that. But I do think it moves people to be open to new ideas and the possibility that maybe we got it wrong. But that's tough. So I really do appreciate your time and your way of thinking, because I do think you express it in a way which I do embrace. But again, I always try to think about, well, what if that did happen? How would I, is there a testable or testable hypothesis there? Because otherwise, as a scientist, I can't go there, right? But, you know, maybe I'm being too much of a purist. But I, you know, I just finished reading E.O. Wilson's book about how creativity came about. I mean, it's beautiful writing, but it's descriptive. And a lot of it is wrong because it's just looking at the, you know, skimming. It's not really diving deeply into understanding causality in a way which understands, you know, how these things likely did occur, as opposed to, well, this is a nice, you know, imagery of what happened. But it's really not taking us to the next level of understanding to, to understanding consciousness. You know, we all understand that understanding consciousness is critically important, especially at this stage in our understanding of who and what we are, right? I don't know if I've convinced you that I've tapped into what consciousness is. I think if it's not exactly right, I think it's close to it because, you know, just by Occam, parsimony, I'd say, well, why would we have to think about other modalities than the fact that it's our physiology that's talking to us and to the cosmos? You know, why do we have to invent these extraordinary trends or out-of-body kinds of things? I understand why people do it. They're desperate to understand it. But I don't think that's necessary. I think you can still come up with the goods without having to invent stuff. So the book that I just published is on hormones and reality. And the reason I published that book is because it's now known that the endocrine system is under epigenetic control. That speaks volumes in terms of the kinds of things I've been talking about. Why it is that the endocrine system fosters these kinds of behaviors. And why we have near-death experiences or out-of-body experiences, Maslow peak, peak experiences, meditation, the results of the meditative process, all those things fit with the neuroendocrine mechanisms that I describe in the chapters in this book. So cool. I love how we could even begin looking at this from a, as we synthesize science of spirituality, that even something like the endocrine system and the way that if we feel, let's say, more unity with the cosmos, with God, with the one, that the way that our endocrine system will express itself within our body hormonically will be in a greater, let's say, harmony and balance and peace than in a more stressed, courtesolic, anger sort of style of expression, dis-ease. And so that, yes, so that is so cool. So we can begin, because I can see, I basically envision right now, I mean, we call this future presence when you're imagining or envisioning what's happening in 2030 now, things like that. And so right now, what I'm feeling is I'm feeling like seeing scientists coming on board to knowing themselves as the one infinite by axis points, like what you described, where they recognize that, because they're, they're such a, like you said, there's such a, like a tunnel vision on the specific thing that scientists are studying, like endocrine system or whatever it may be. And then when they read, for example, John's paper about how the endocrine system is in this inextricable relationship with the cosmos. And so then it sort of opens up a little, we could say gate or portal to the scientists doing the investigation to recognize that they are the cosmos themselves. And there's no separation between themselves and this ultimate power or force. So good. I agree with that. Yeah, I think that maybe I could ask you, I mean, I'm in communication with clinical psychologists who has the capacity to read his patients in a way where, so I gave him the example of some problematic patient who had a horrific family history in which her grand, the grandfather died in the house fire and the clinician could smell burnt flesh. I'm of the opinion that he's actually somehow proceeding the quantum level of the person. And so the question is how do you, I mean, I understand how the quantum comes into the equation. I just, other than what I said about left right brain, how is it that we are will be able to in a predictive way understand the quantum aspect of physiology? Is that just a matter of practice? I mean, the way that I sort of convinced myself of the validity of that idea that bipedalism and the evolution of consciousness as I played devil's advocate, and I said, okay, if stress is what brought that on, what about a condition where you're in a low stress situation? And I thought of meditation in the exact opposite of how the adrenaline affects cellular physiology occurs in meditation. And meditation in turn allows you to go from brain brain to gut brain to skin brain. In some people, I think it's, it's, I must be highly rare to somebody to go back to the skin brain, which is actually the origin, the cell membrane is the origin of all our physiology. But my point being that my sense is that somehow in that progression, or that progressive kind of process, you reach a level at which you are now no longer in a realm where you're sensing things in a Newtonian way, but now in a quantum way. Yeah, yes, yes. So one way to, to sense this is through, you could say vibration or, yeah, I think that's probably the best way to describe it quantum mechanically. So like the vibration of two entities or humans, let's say, in conversation with each other. And I'm just going to blow this up out of proportion just to make it a point to make it easy to understand. But where one human, let's say, is more meditative and has a deeper sense of peace and equanimity and happiness, joy, and then the other human has a straws high levels of stress and high levels of agitation and high levels of anxiety, and maybe even depression. And this one typically thinks that they're a victim of the universe. And this one typically thinks that they're the creator of their reality. And so then, then the way, yeah, the way that these two interface, you could say vibrationally, is that the creator, the more meditative, the easeful one, you could say, if you want to follow some of the Eastern as well tradition, that the chakras or the energy centers inside of the body are less blocked. And so in the tourists, right, of the flow of energy in the body in the central nervous system, up the actual spinal channel and out the top of the head, that that is less blocked. But in the one that has a greater dis ease, those the channel and the energy centers are more blocked. And so the words that come out of the mouth of the one that is more blocked are typically the words. So you can sense it bodily based on vibration, but you can also sense it in the words that they speak, right, the logos, these words are very telling of like the state of the frequency or the vibration that the entity is at. So for example, for them, they might speak in ways that are trying to extract something to make them feel good, to make them feel worthy or get some validation or something like that. They want to get peace from outside of themselves. And then just to briefly contrast the one that's more meditative is typically speaking or using words in ways that are trying to serve life from an emptier place from a place that's already whole or already fulfilled. And so you can tell by the way people speak vibrational, you could say quantum mechanically. So is the the nor the observer, perhaps, I don't know what the right term is, but the one who is more at peace with themselves acting like an energy sink. Yes, drawing out of the negative energy of the of the of the observed. Yep. I mean, it's interesting to me from a physical perspective, because I stumbled on to this whole homology between a black hole and a cell. So this Beckenstein back in the mid 70s had discovered he was trying to determine the total energy of a black hole. And contrary to what he had expected, that it was going to be related to the volume of the black hole. It was actually related to the surface area. And so I started and because of the similarities between a black hole and a cell in the context of gravity, I always forget this term something. So basically, there's a horizon element in the black hole. And I am of the opinion that the cell does the same thing in its ideal state, its information, its being is on the surface. And that if you're in a negative, if you're that observed person who is in kind of a negative state of consciousness, that the the information is is hidden, but that you can extract it, right, through the way the way that you describe something like that. Yeah. And as as you were referencing earlier, it's important where if the one that has the energy blockages is interfacing with the one that's more free and does not have the energy blockages, typically what's happening is that the one that is more free is typically reflecting something to the one that is more blocked. So the one that is more blocked is typically asking the one that's more free for this reflection. And the one that's more free provides some sort of reflection that then for the one that's more blocked, they'll like go through an internal process of of going to wherever that block is energetically and liberating themselves from that block. So say that I'm speaking in a way that's manipulative because I'm trying to get people to see me for myself image and to think that I'm really cool. So then what usually the one that will reflect will do it will reflect something to the one that's trying to get validation by through self image, and it'll get them to recognize that pattern of behavior. And then simply by seeing that pattern of behavior that they were expressing, they can then free themselves of that pattern of behavior and just feel automatically whole or more free rather than needing to extract validation or trying to get people to see their their self image to feel whole. So it's simple things like that with like reflecting behavioral patterns or another one. So in it just briefly also it's because the work has to be done by the entity themselves. The work is never done outside of the entity. The work is always chosen by the entity themselves to go into the space where they don't want to go, you know, shadow unconscious subconscious etc. And by going into those regions, that's exactly where the transformation happens the caterpillar becomes the butterfly, if you will the metamorphosis happens transmutation transformation alchemy all those good things happen simply by turning to the areas inside of oneself where we don't want to go. And that if we just go that then we can actually feel free and freer in our expression and actually more in service to life and less trying to get something out of it. Yeah, yeah, well actually even considered in that, you know, lateralization left right brain, when you and I look into one another one another's eyes there is not you eliminate that left right dichotomy, right? So, you know, in the capacity to do that in an authentic way may not be, you know, like a switch, but I think it has something to do with that authenticity of that interrelationship is my sense. Oh, cool. But what you just described, I mean, is this all coming from Eastern Vendetta Vedantic theory or, or belief? Or is this just your own way of understanding the interrelationship of the two, the two, you know, parties involved? Where's it coming from what you just expressed to me? I would say mostly through direct experience and then the just the distillation of what is most cutting edge about that possible. So, yeah, just the synthesis of all of the peak of scientific literature as well as spiritual literature as well as a direct experience with this process. We have an organization called the No Limit Society. We're basically training free agents for the ignition of global awakening. And so in this process, we have hundreds of people coming from around the world that are interested in how to sort of empty themselves of their own self interest and their own self image and their own ego and shadow and subconscious and whatnot and be more like empty vessels for the life waking up to itself and how to like architect out these nations around the planet that are decentralized that have the basic needs be met that swim in abundance, energetic abundance, awake abundance. I mentioned to you earlier this Shambhala. And so you could say it's, it's both like a, it's like Buddhist and Vikings at the same time, right? So you have like the Elon Musk entrepreneurial excitement creation, but at the same time you have the Buddhist realized awakened ones. And so it's a it's like the simultaneity of that. So yeah, mostly through direct experience and also through through my team here through the different scientific and spiritual literature and distilling that and just parsing for signal above everything else. Like just parsing for truth for signal above everything else because there's just so much to try and swim through and like and learn. But if you find what's most salient, most relevant, the needles in the haystack, if you will, an accumulation of thousands of needles in a lifetime swimming across different haystacks. Oh my gosh, those needles just compound on each other. And then we can describe the physics of metaphysical phenomena. So like in this case, these two entities, one feeling more free, one feeling more blocked, we can actually express at a scientific, at a physical level, what's happening metaphysically. And it's, it's so, so interesting. Yeah. Yeah, one, one thing I wanted to mention in this context that I find fascinating is, we now know, for example, that identical twins are not identical. But that comes from the fact that we now know that me, but when it divides, it doesn't do so symmetrically. So there's going to be the observer and the observed. There's an asymmetry right from the get go. So, you know, those is that what has to be resolved. I mean, each daughter cell is going to have its own life experience. But then in the process of somehow reconciling all of that, if reconciliation is what, you know, has to occur, then you go through the process, you're talking about something like that, that there's a heterogeneity that then has to become a, or ideally would become a homogeneity of the collective unconscious, something like that. So something of that order. It's fascinating to me that you and I are talking about this from very different perspectives, but we're really talking about the same thing. Yeah, totally. It almost, you know, one thing that comes to mind is, you know, this whole concept of the, you know, that we need to ground, literally, electrically ground ourselves, because we collect too much electrical energy and, you know, it sort of messes things up as one ploy to alleviate the, you know, Bateson's double bind for lack of a better way of expressing it, the neuroses, the psychoses, the confusion about, you know, means and ends cause and effect like that. One of the ways to explain grounding oneself could also just be meditation itself. And the act of meditation has a lot of, to be like properly explained is very important because just by like calming the mind or like the fluctuations of the mind, which is trying to race into these different webs, like we talked about earlier, there's like interdependent webs and concepts and ideas that is running between and we could just think of meditation as the process of sort of like reeling back the, using the breath as a tool to reel back the intense proliferation to a state that is more concentrated, focused, calm. And in doing so, there can be a realization of who the one that is speaking truly is and who the one that is listening right now truly is and how that intelligence is just with itself and that is just God or the one and that that's just as simple as it gets and that upon that realization you sort of, you release your attachment to your individual identity so much and you can more easily empty yourself out of everything that you were trying to get personally and instead now we can be more empty for that intelligence to serve itself as this earth wakes up and there's nothing more freeing than that anyway. But so that component to this is so important to know truly what meditation is or to know truly what the like the cessation of the mental proliferation, what that truly gives you access to and I feel like that might be what you're referencing with this grounding because we know so many people that are just obsessively speaking about concepts and ideas and proliferating about their sense of self and their sense of self worth and creating separation with other people that they have no relation to and so that whole process is it's like a weapon of mass destruction really like more than nukes you could say the largest weapon of mass destruction is the sense of self and the sense of separation and so that if we begin looking at it that way we can really quickly heal earth and heal each other and wake up to peace unity prosperity abundance for all when you no longer see a separation between you and other then it becomes easier to only care about wanting to meet the basic needs of the whole world and to have everybody be swimming in prosperity and abundance why not so this is this is where this leads to yeah yeah when you talked about breath I used to be a long-distance runner and you know I used to experience that runners high but then I could I figured out how to bring it on deliberately by just sinking my breathing to my heart rate to my the pace I was running at I could I could bring it on deliberately um on yeah nice yeah yeah but but I think it's important to understand that all this because you know I've been exposed to these kinds of eastern thoughts for my entire life really but that I always thought of that as separate from what I think about but now in the realization that that the physical out my physiology is totally consistent with what you're talking about I think it's important to realize it's within us it's we only have to be able to realize how it how it functions within us in order to get everything sort of you know aligned in a way where now you are able to interface in an effective way that may sound trivial but I don't think it is and you and I both know they're most people I don't think are really in touch with their own physiology um they don't care to be it's it's icky but but if you understand it in a way so I'm fascinated by the placebo effect which I'm sure you're aware of because I'm I'm convinced that once you understand that you have some pain somewhere you can direct your energies toward that pain and you can alleviate it totally yeah I mean you can do that deliberately or better said I think you can figure out how to do that and and you can be more and more competent at it in the same way that you were talking about the interaction between two people even within yourself you can alleviate the distance this homeostasis the the lack of equilibrium of your physiologic equilibrium within yourself as a proof of principle to yourself and you know and there is room there is place obviously for medicine because because there are places where it's not possible for whatever reason um and maybe that will become clearer as people become practitioners of their own of taking control of their own physiology as best they can yeah yeah it sounds like a lot of lines yep well thank you I mean this has been remarkable um so cool John thank you I mean I hope something I said was helpful to you I I um definitely yeah and I and I really appreciate how you um you passed uh like an entire life on getting excited about this theme and that this theme is the theme like it is the coolest place for you to be focused on and um and like 200 paper seven books I mean that's that's big stuff to be able to like there's there's nuggets there's wisdoms there's gems across all of those and that that's such a cool feat like I feel that every time that I um that I make one of these is sort of like a little paper if you will and there's going to be some little nuggets in here that the viewers can take away not only from what John was sharing but from what Atlas was sharing and ultimately it's just what the one is sharing to itself and so I'm really happy also that you have and you've been serving in so many other ways too even like scientifically epigenetically like for for people to recognize that like I know I can't like my children are going to have a little higher likelihood of asthma if I'm spoken around them I mean just these really simple things like that are um that are intuitively simple but then when you bring scientific literature to them too then they go okay fine now I can't screw around with this so I mean there's just there's countless ways and as professing for students teaching students I mean there's so many great ways that you've been serving and so it's my honor really to to speak with you on this podcast and to have you as a guest thank you I just wanted to say in closing that I I opted to be a scientist to contribute to the front of knowledge because I'm the child of Holocaust survivors and I'm convinced that the Holocaust was a consequence of ignorance and if there's any way I could improve our the human lot in terms of knowledge building of knowledge and realization that there's more to life than meets the eye that's where I want it to be so but this what you and I've been talking about I think is really yeah the epitome of what I was trying to achieve in at a very at a higher level really at a more holistically higher level yeah so thank you cool yeah because holistic is the name of the game yeah the whole totally thanks everyone for tuning in we'll thank our audience we really appreciate you guys we'd love to hear from you in the comments below you can type out what you learned from the podcast any maybe questions that you have for john we would be happy to to jump in there and respond as much as we can also if the video brought you value give it a like it helps the youtube algorithm also subscribe to the channel if you haven't yet also share the video with others that you feel like this would positively benefit and also check out the links in the bio below so we'll have a bunch of john's links down there and you can check out his work down there and support him also feel free to reach out to him if you have any further inquiries along his lines of work or his materials or collaboration inquiries that kind of stuff and yeah that's all you can also of course continue finding our links in the bio below to the books that I've written or also to no limit society to join if you'd like to and that's all that's all folks so john I'm gonna I'm gonna just go ahead and end the recording but then you and I will stay in the zoo room for a little bit longer okay sure thanks everybody much love