Issue 9 February 2011
Quantum
potentials (ERP), among other things. An ERP is an indication that the brain has had a perception or other kind of sensory input, even though the person may not yet be consciously aware of that perception or experience. In other words, there is a tiny time lapse between taking in sensory input (evidenced through brain activity) and experiencing that input (conscious awareness). So, the researchers were gathering information about this time lapse. To roughly explain the experiment, let’s use an example subject called Bob.
In the lab, Bob was fitted with brain and body monitoring equipment, and then seated in front of a computer terminal. He didn’t have to do anything except focus on the images that would soon be flashing across the computer screen. A total of about forty images would be shown, each separated by a five to seven seconds and each staying on the screen about eight to ten seconds.
The images were of two kinds: some of them were void of much emotional content (a basket of flowers, a sunset, a kitten) whereas others were of highly emotional content (erotic images, autopsy photos, graphic depictions of war carnage). In one “run” of the experiment, a series of 40 or so images would be chosen at random by the computer from a large library of such images. Neither the volunteer nor the researchers knew what kind of picture would be appearing next, an emotionally charged one or an emotionally neutral one.
After running hundreds, and in some cases thousands, of these tests, an amazing anomaly appeared in the results. Although the researchers were only looking for the microsecond time lapse between the brain registering the sensory input and the conscious and physical mind-body awareness of that input, what they actually found mystified them: it appeared that the brain and body were responding before an image even appeared on the computer screen. If a emotionally benign picture came up, there was little or no brain or body response. But if an image was one with high emotional value, the subject’s brain and body registered an
www.quantumhealthmagazine.com
appropriate stress response up to an average of 3.5 seconds before the emotionally charged image appeared onscreen. That’s seconds, not microseconds! Three seconds is an eternity in the universe of the body’s biology. Somehow, the brain and body not only knew when an image was about to appear, but they knew what kind of emotional content the image would contain. That’s precognition!
The researchers at HeartMath decided to recreate this kind of test and monitor the heart as well to see if it had any unique response and played a role in the seemingly intuitive response the brain was displaying. It turns out that the heart did indeed have a role to play—it trumped the brain in its precognitive/intuitive “knowing!” The heart responded about 4.8 seconds before an emotionally charged image appeared, almost two seconds faster than the brain! From this and other research data, the HeartMath researchers revealed that the heart actually sends the brain crucial sensory information, and not vice versa, which is tantamount to anarchy in the current biological framework whereby nothing happens until the brain makes it happen. And the heart appears to be more “intuitive” than the brain. Its connection to the fabric of reality appears to be stronger than the brain’s.
These research results and others have opened a Pandora’s Box of sorts in biology, for there is no stuffing away of these test results. They are standing up to scrutiny and being repeated by others. They are changing the way we look at our heart—and ultimately how we engage our “heart energy.” The ancient Chinese, I think, would be making a deep bow toward these modern researchers who have had the vision and curiosity to perform experiments that are revealing that the heart truly is the “emperor of the body.”
* To seek out the best research on the heart as a sensory organ, see the work of The Institute for HeartMath (Rollin McCraty and Doc Childe), Walter Cannon, B.C. Lacey and J. L. Lacey, J.A. Amour and J.L. Andell, R. C. Frysinger, and M. W. van der Molen. For research specific to the heart see the HeartMath research pages at http://www.heartmath. org/research/science-of-the-heart/
introduction.html.
HEALTH
Quantum Health 43
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76