Books and Abstracts

Here are some Books and Abstracts free for download written by Ian A. Wilson. They are in PDF format.

Shared Dreaming – Real Life Inception

Shared Dreaming – Real Life Inception
By Ian Wilson (2010) Public Domain No Copyright.

Definition
Shared Dreaming or Mutual Dreaming mentioned by Stephen LaBerge[1] and Lynda Lane Magallon[2] is a type of dream where two or more people share the same dream content from the their own perspective. Upon waking the participants are able to recall the same details, settings and even conversations they had with each other during the mutual dream.

Research
Stephen LaBerge writes in his book “Lucid Dreaming”[1] that “Accounts of “mutual dreaming,” (dreams apparently shared by two or more people) raise the possibility that the dream world may be in some cases just as objectively real as the physical world. This is because the primary criterion of “objectivity” is that an experience is shared by more than one person, which is supposedly true of mutual dreams. In that case, what would happen to the traditional dichotomy between dreams and reality?”

Tom Campbell[3] who worked at The Monroe Institute[4] in Virginia writes in his trilogy entitled “My Big Toe”[3] that during their exploration phase at the Monroe Labs during sleep; himself and other participants practising the skill of being consciously awake when the body is asleep were able to verify a mutual meeting that would be recorded in a control room.

The Monroe Institute is a research centre founded by Robert A. Monroe[5] for the purpose of researching a phenomena that occurs during sleep called the Out-Of-Body experience[6] or OOBE and OBE. Robert A. Monroe has been one of the leading pioneers in consciousness research spanning over 40 years in the area of waking lucid awareness while the body slept.

Other research organizations have catalogued their own evidence of shared dreaming. The International Association for the Study of Dreams[7] has had yearly dream telepathy[8] contests which have yielded positive mutual dreaming accounts along with other phenomenological dream experiences. Many of the researchers have themselves had mutual dreams with each other. The IASD compiled a list of researchers to discuss the movie Inception where many of the researchers commented on the reality of mutual dreaming.[9] Link

Lynda Lane Magallon published a book entitled “Mutual Dreaming”[2] where she covers history of this phenomena and personal accounts with people involved with dream research. The president for the IASD, Robert Waggoner recently published “Lucid Dreaming: Gateway to the Inner Self”[10] where he touches on mutual dreaming.

Personal Experience
As the author of this article, I have also enjoyed the rare opportunity to have shared dreams with people in my 23 years of dream exploration. It is for this reason that I feel compelled to share some of my insights into the phenomena based on personal experience and what I have read in regards to theory.

In 1988 I would have my first confirmed shared dream with a friend during a time when I had no idea that such a phenomena was possible. This first hand experience with shared dreaming seemed incredible. This friend and I would have several shared dreams in the time that followed.

The journey to have these wilfully was met with a high level of uncertainty and challenges. I will share what I observed and learned from these explorations. For a more detail account, read the interview with Robert Waggoner as I discuss many of the expeirences with dreaming in greater detail for the Lucid Dream Exchange Magazine 55th June Edition.[11] link

Personal Theories
The first question you must have as a reader is how is this possible? Clearly the above list of researchers and investigators have made some very startling claims. It would be easy to dismiss this as fantasy and move on; however I encourage you to have open minded scepticism when moving forward into understanding the mechanics involved in sleep related phenomenology.

If mutual dreaming was common or easy; many more people would be reporting this with each other, however you may be a person who has told a friend or family member about a dream; to have it confirmed by them that they too remember the same dream if not something very similar.

Is the dreamstate objective? That is the first question you have to really ask when trying to discern if shared dreaming is possible at all. The evidence from personal experience is compelling indicating some type of objectivity within dreams. Carl Jung[12] famously spoke about a collective unconscious that we were all accessing during sleep.

A collective unconsciousness suggests that in the sleeping state; we are all part of one collective unconscious system. Buddhist believe in Indra’s Net or Web[13] which describes that all phenomena is interconnected. Tom Campbell expands on this concept in his trilogy, “My-Big-Toe”[3] where he describes a Reality Wide Web or RWW that we all access as consciousness and download experience in the form of data.

It is through this interconnectedness that we have the mechanics that surround the reality of Shared Dreaming. Another theory of interconnectedness stems from Quantum Mechanics through entanglement.

Quantum entanglement[14] is when two or more objects are linked and affect each other in a non-localized way when separated. Considering the Big Bang theory and the existence of a singularity;[15] it is theoretically plausible that everything coming from the singularity has varying degrees of entanglement affecting the entire system.

Consciousness functions at quantum states and itself may be subjective to the same quantum mechanics that affect photons. As a result of being part of this interconnected system, our consciousness may be linked through entanglement with all other systems at these finitely small levels.

Just recently scientists were able to teleport information through quantum entanglement range of 10 miles[16]. This in itself is a remarkable feat of practical use of quantum states. The human brain already naturally use these quantum states as is evident in Pemrose-Hameroff Orch Or model[17]. If science can teleport quantum information 10 miles; who is to say that the human brain is not already able to achieve this type of communication.

Shared dreaming is already demonstrating that some type of information sharing is possible and the more we understand this interconnectedness; the more we will be able to unravel how the mechanics of information exchange work between these quantum systems.

Quantum Mechanics proves that information can be teleported between entangled photons. The human brain uses photons in the alpha-beta tublin as part of the information processing (Penrose-Hameroff)[17]. The human brain is natures quantum super computer.

It seems based on shared dreaming evidence that some type of information exchange is possible during sleep. From a singularity to a massive expanding Universe one would at least expect that anything is possible. Interconnectedness is quantum fact; not just Buddhist belief. As to what scale or magnitude this represents is a matter for science to resolve. Shared dreaming is just the tip of the iceburg for how information has organized itself within the Universe.

If we can’t accept Indra’s Web, or Tom’s Reality Wide Web; we can at least accept science fact that there is interconnectedness within quantum states; and to what degree of entanglement exists since the expansion of the singularity should intrigue the minds of people like Stephen Hawkins[18].

If we came from one; are we not all part of one? With the collapse of the Universe we inevitable become one again; or at least the quantum soup that we formed. Where consciousness begins and ends within quantum states may be completely entangled with what photons are. Photons after all; are the functioning energy driving the quantum computer called the human mind. We may not measure consciousness, but we know photons play a role in facilitating the existence of consciousness within the human brain.

Now that we have this theoretical muse done with let’s get back on topic with the reality of shared dreaming.

Limitations in Mutual Dreaming
Let’s first examine what obstacles affect the majority of the population in regards to dream related phenomena. The first obvious flaw in the Human Condition is we are not active dreamers en mass. The truth is we are passive dreamers with little or no development in this area of skill. The population of the planet for the most part is dream illiterate.

Dreaming is not a belief; it is an experience that has the potential for participation. It predominantly is the realm of the unconscious self; and our waking self tends to drift off into altered unconscious states affected by the random mindless direction of irrational right brain symbolism.

When we sleep; we enter into five stages of sleep[19] ranging from 4 stages of NREM (Non-REM) and 1 stage of REM. Most of our dream recall occurs during the REM stage of sleep. Even though we are in unconscious states during NREM, evidence in sleep laboratories have confirmed that we are at least still dreaming. However, oblivious to what ever that information may be.

One would logically assume that two participants who are to share a dream; if such a possibility exists would then at least have to synchronize the REM stage of sleep with the intent to share a dream. If one participant is in NREM with no chance of dream recall and the other participant is in REM, then the chances of a mutual exchange would be greatly diminished by the causality of these two states.

When we sleep, there are changes in the physiology of the Human brain. The temporal frontal lobes, responsible for memory shuts down. This forces a condition called sleep induced amnesia. Although we may have unconscious dream experience during this shut-down; we will have no memory access to what ever information exists. Unless of course we are somehow able to override the function of a deactivated memory bank

On the other side of the RWW; there is a very good chance that I have seen what this results in with other people when attempting to share dreams with them. One of the interesting anomalies is a certain state that I have found my targets in during a lucid dream. This observation has also been said the same of me with another friend who has tried to connect with me via a mutual dream.

The state clearly demonstrates that the participant is in a catatonic zombie like state. The lively, alert and consciously aware aspect is inactive. When trying to ask questions or gain any eye contact, I have found the participant vegetative, if they respond they can respond fearfully and scream or roll their head and eyes slowly. How they act seems totally irrational and emotionally driven.

I admit it has always creeped me out when encountering a friend or family member in this particular state of mind during sleep. Having others confirm I have also been found in this state in their dreams furthers my desire to want to always maintain full consciousness during sleep.

Linked to the physiology of cognitive function in the brain; if there is a link… it makes sense that the logical left-brain intellect is deactivated and finding a person in this near zombie like state is not an illogical observation; it makes sense. As to what scope or scale people are and how often we wander the dream state and RWW in a catatonic state of unconscious awareness; is most likely measured by the number of people living on the planet.

When I have walked in a dream down town I find groups and gatherings of people all in this state. It seemed to suggest to me at least that everyone is potentially wandering aimlessly in this mutual state. They are devoid of the left-brain cognitive function to fully realize and participate in this state as we would in our waking life.

As a teenager my friend and I coined this state, “Sleeper’s Grog” a drunken state we find each other in from time to time.

In attempts to force a mutual dream, I have successfully snapped my friend out of this state that once successful resulted in a shared dream. He gave me eye contact and said my name; we had full connectivity as he activated just enough cognitive function to start participating and remembering the dream.

In some shared dreams; I have watched my friend slip back into this state. During that segment of the shared dream recall; we find out that the person dreamed something completely different then what I had observed until their attention was restored focusing on me.

I feel this information is important that is why I share it. It would be nice to have further confirmation from other mutual dream researchers as to finding people in a non-responsive state during attempts to share dreams with them.

When a person seems to react negatively to the dream stimuli; they do retract and slip into this state creating a type of personification of the dream that overlaps the mutual potential with a totally subjective experience. The observation of this in action is immensely fascinating to me.

It seems to me that the following challenges prevent everyday mutual dreaming:

  1. Both participants need to be synchronized in REM sleep; any NREM and REM mix between the participants will negate the cognitive qualities required for memory, awareness and perception.
  2. Participants need to have at least enough memory, awareness and perception to focus and maintain a coherent experience in the dream.
  3. Participants need to have developed enough skill with dreaming to invoke these cognitive qualities to increase the probability of shared dreaming.
  4. Most people are not active dreamers; they are passive. Shared dreams are possible but may prove more difficult between active and passive dreamers.
  5. People can personalize the dream to fulfill fantasies, desires and fears; this subjective projection will override any mutual exchange.
  6. Upon waking people often forget their dreams; this could be a form of waking induced amnesia. There is clearly amnesiac states that occur with sleeping.
    Clearly conscious awareness and left-brain cognitive function is a requirement of quality dream awareness, perception and recall. It is in these three attributes that we find a good skill set that mutual dreamers can work towards to improve the potential to share a dream.
  7. Dreams are thought-reactive so negative beliefs and disbelief can override mutual exchange in favour of personification of the dream state.

How to improve Shared Dreaming Potential
What can we do to improve dream sharing?

If you want to share dreams with your friends, you need to find friends that share this same passion and desire as you. Having a lucid dreaming skill set and a fellow lucid dreamer is the optimal condition to increase the probability of sharing a dream. Here is a link to a tutorial I wrote on Lucid Dreaming which covers some proven techniques. link

Writing down your dreams in a journal and talking with those you feel you might have had a connection with is the only way to start to gain real world feedback and confirmation of a shared dream.

There is no question this is going to be a lot harder then having a lucid dream, or precognitive dream; however the rewards of success are rich indeed. Having first hand experience and knowledge of this reality of shared dreaming far out weighs having only an idea or belief that it could possibly exist.

Shared dreaming should not be a belief; it should be an experience that you invoke and create by actively participating in your dream rather then passively letting this opportunity slip by.

You direct the experience with your belief and intent. The outcome of success lies completely at your disposal.

Hopefully this has helped encourage your explorative and pioneer spirit. The more that people can become aware of this reality; the greater the chances are that more shared dreaming will occur.

I personally feel that this is an evolutionary potential that requires participation. Everything dream related is one of active participation and exploration. We are still pioneering this great frontier of inner-space. When you graduate from belief with first hand knowledge and experience? What will you do to help others with this gift?

Know that organizations and research centres already exist like the IASD and the Monroe Institute. Research and learn from these scientists, physicists and explorers of conscious space. You can get involved on their forums and attend classes.

Form a dream group with your friends and family. Share material such as this article and educate people that more and more knowledge and verification of this potential exists. Most of all; find out through first hand personal experience the potential you have as a dreamer. Don’t let a gift this great go to waste.

Author
Ian Wilson
Blog | Facebook Group | Twitter

References

  1. Stephen LaBerge (1985) “Lucid Dreaming: The power of being aware and awake in your dreams
  2. Linda Lane Magallón (1997) “Mutual Dreaming
  3. Tom Campbell (2005) “My Big Toe
  4. The Monroe Institute (1970s) (wiki) | Homepage
  5. Robert A. Monroe (1915-1995) (wiki)
  6. Out-Of-Body experience (1943) (wiki)
  7. The International Association for the Study of Dreams IASD Homepage
  8. IASD (2010) “Dream Telepath Contest
  9. IASD (2010) “Inception Review
  10. Robert Waggoner (2010) “Lucid Dreaming: Gateway to the Inner Self
  11. Robert Waggoner (2010) “Lucid Dream Exchange Magazine 55th June Edition.
  12. Carl Jung (1959) Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious
  13. Buddhism (3rd Century) “Indra’s Net
    Quantum entanglement[14]
  14. Big Bang theory (wiki)
  15. Discovery News (2010) “Beam Me Up, Scotty! Scientists Teleport Info 10 Miles
  16. Penrose-Hameroff (1998) “Quantum Computation In Brain Microtubules?
  17. Stephen Hawkins (wiki
  18. Kendra Cherry “Stages of Sleep

The Anatomy of a Precognitive Dream

The Anatomy of a Precognitive Dream.
By Ian Wilson (2010) Public Domain No Copyrights.
Also see: The Theory of Precognitive Dreams

Definition
A precognitive dream is a type of dream that comes true as a future event. It is also known as Déjà Rêvé (Art Funkhouser, Dr. Vernon Neppe).[1] It can bring about the same sensations associated with Déjà Vu such as the Déja Vu Aura, goose-bumps etc.

Types of Precognitive Dreams

  1. Symbolic Precognitive Dream.
  2. Literal Precognitive Dream.
  3. 3rd Person Precognitive Dream.
  4. Lucid Precognitive Dream.[2]

Symbolic Precognitive Dream
Dream symbolism abstracts the precognitive information and generally is not realized up until the actual event. This can be a very difficult type of dream to identify as a type of precognitive dream, however certain symbols in the dream can match or greatly exaggerate the future event when it actualizes. The accuracy and quality of this type of dream should be considered of a low grade type of precognition.

Literal Precognitive Dream
From a first-person view, this type of precognitive dream in literal detail. What you sense, think and feel in the dream can actualize in the future-tense when the dream actualizes. This dream can bring about a Déjà Vu aura however linking the memory of the déjà to a dream is what classifies this type of dream as Déjà Rêvé.

3rd Person Precognitive Dream
From a third-person vantage point, this type of precognitive dream can take on both symbolic and literal similarities however does not suggest that the information being observed will occur from a first-person point of view.

Lucid Precognitive Dream
A lucid dream is a dream where a person is awake and realizes that they are dreaming. This alert and awakened focus state also can emerge within the phenomena of precognitive dreams. This type of precognitive dream can have an even more pronounced déjà vu aura then a non-lucid precognitive dream. Robert Waggoner explains there are two types of lucid precognitive dreams: Active and Ambient.[4]
In an active lucid precognitive dream, the dreamer actively tries to engage the precognitive dream, where in an ambient lucid dream the dreamer passively observes the dream remaining within the usual dream flow.

History
Babylonian “Epic of Gilgamesh” a Sumerian Poem suggests precognitive dreams in tablet 1 where Gilgamesh dreams about the imminent arrival of two companions, or the ominous dream received by Enkidu on tablet 6. The “Epic of Gilgamesh” is one of considered one of the oldest works of literature and predates biblical text at approximately 2150BC and could be one of the earliest suggestions of precognitive dreams.[5]

Aristotle published a paper entitled “On Prophesying by Dreams” [6]written in 350BC which questions with skepticism the validity of claims by those who say they have dreams of the future. He does not completely refute the notion of precognitive dreams, however understands that much of what is dreamed could be coincidence. It’s clear that ancient Greeks subscribed to prophecy as evident in Homer’s “Iliad” and “Odyssey” where in Cassandra is granted the gift of prophecy by Apollo. The Greek God Morpheus resides in a land of Dreams somewhere in the Underworld where two gates exist, one that sends false dreams through the gate of ivory, and the other that sends prophetic dreams gate of horns.

Theory
Answers to why precognitive dreams occur may lie in quantum mechanics and the effects on consciousness. If future information exists, as suggested by people who claim to experience precognition, certain theories in Physics might apply, for example Hugh Everett many-worlds interpretation [6], which is an evolving theory stemming from Erwin Schrödinger’s cat paradox [7].

In a quantum view of a many-world system, every possible past, present and future probability could theoretically exist as probability. We know through quantum superposition that a particle can exist in every possible state until observed. Physicists are just starting to understand quantum information, and if this information is non-linear and existing within an astronomical data-set, it is possible that the Universe has organized into a complex information system and data structure that had per-populated itself with a myriad of probability that may exist in an astronomical scale.

Stuart Hameroff[8] proposes that the human brain is both a Neurocomputer and Quantum computer [9]. The link to the computational nature of the brain and how quantum mechanics may link to consciousness could explain that some type of entanglement and superposition affects human consciousness. Pemrose and Hameroff [10] have discerned that the brain uses coherent photons as part of the brain mechanics and is used to preform information processing. Photons contribute to what we view as consciousness, and consciousness itself may have quantum states that through time and research we can unravel.

The Universe itself can be viewed as information that our brains must access and render into a model that we call subjective reality. A unique first-person vantage point within an objective dataset. Regardless of how objective reality is, it must always be subjectively experienced by a conscious observer.

The nature of quantum mechanics is revealing through superposition that matter and energy could also be viewed as information. If we consider the Universe as an information system, then past/present/future could exist in every possible conceived state as probability and data. Digital Physics, first termed by Edward Fredkin [10] has emerged with serious considerations that Reality itself could be computative in nature, a Universal computer so to speak.

This idea is supported by Tom Campbell “My Big Toe”[11], Brian Witworth “The Physical World as Virtual Reality”[12], Seth Lloyd “Programming the Universe”[13], Stephen Wolfram “Cellular Automata”[14], Max Tegmark “Mathematical universe hypothesis”[15] and the list goes on.

In Brian Witworths work, there is a quote that seems to resonate with the nature of precognitive dreams, “This makes this world a recursive interface, that both sends to and receives from itself. If so, it is like no other information interface that we know.”

It is in this quote and within the nature of precognitive dreams that we may see the emergence of the recursive feedback in the form of probable reality in a dream, to the actualized reality when the dream comes true. It could be suggested that the precognitive dream itself is a form of reality per-programming within this recursive interface, and the actualization of the dream is the feedback within the greater system.

How is this possible? What are the mechanics that drive this system and allows for non-linear, non-localized dreams to actualize into reality? At this point, we have theories and ideas evolving from those who understand and see a relationship between consciousness and reality. If we look again at physics, there is another anomaly that suggests the observe affects wave-function collapse: “Wave function, initially in a superposition of different eigenstates, appears to reduce to a single one of the states after interaction with an observer. In simplified terms, it is the condensation of physical possibilities into a single occurrence, as seen by an observer.”

The observer effect brings about the measurement problem in Quantum Mechanics and stirs the debate if wave-function collapse occurs at all, however the Double-slit experiment[16] demonstrates wave / particle duality and further entangles the observer into the role of one who collapses wave function.

This is an interesting enigma within science, it suggests a link between the observer and the observed. That deterministic probability is being actualized as the observer renders reality through the act of collapsing wave-function and probability. It seems like a stretch to the imagination but we are talking about precognitive dreams here.

Dreaming for the most part is a passive experience where we project our thoughts, ideas and emotions into a virtual 3D world based on the principles of organized thought. At some point within this creative process of dreaming, certain dreams appear to qualify as “precognitive” in nature. A seeming unknown potential that does not become apparent to the dreamer, until the dream actualizes and the individual is left with the realization that what was once dreamed of, is now actual.

Anatomy of a Precognitive Dream
If we take for face value what a precognitive dream is, it is a type of dream that has future potential. In order for such a dream to come true, it must actualize into an event in physical reality. In the case of a literal precognitive dream, the dream is observed from a subjective vantage point, the physical event that the dream actualizes into must also be perceived from the same subjective vantage point.

This suggests that reality exists in two states: A state by which a person can dream of a future event, and a state where this event actualizes into a physical event. It suggests there is a direct relationship between what is dreamed, and what is later experienced in reality.

In a linear context, the precognitive dream pre-dates the physical event that it represents. In looking at the origin of the physical event. We have an answer to a Causality Dilemma known as, “What came first, the chicken or the egg?” In the case of “What came first, the dream or reality”, in the case of precognitive dreaming, the precognitive dream came first.

Precognitive dreaming is in fact a paradox that exists within the subjective vantage point of certain observers who have had enough memory, awareness and perception during a certain dream that qualifies as a precognitive event. What also makes this unique is that people who often have precognitive dreams, have a varying degree of frequency, clarity and quality. It can range from one precognitive dream in their entire life, to many.

Then there are those who do not have any precognitive dreams, they may not have first-person experience with this paradox to even begin accepting that such a phenomena is real and possible. For the most part, these people are skeptical of others who claim they have. It is up to you to decide what dreams you have had, that qualify as precognitive or not. You can only know through the process of actualization if a dream has any precognitive worth.

A reason as to why this is, (Why some do and some don’t) may have been answered by Tom Campbell who wrote the trilogy entitled, “My Big Toe”[11], where he describes the Psi Uncertainty Principle. The Psi Uncertainty Principle allows for individual growth in areas that may be construed as paranormal or spiritual, without affecting or having impact on others who are not ready to grow in certain areas. Precognitive dreams certainly fit within the described theory as something that affects individual growth more so then affecting many with any mass effect.

Tom also suggests there is a metaphorical big computer (TBC) that organizes data into reality. This idea takes us back to digital physics and virtual reality theory however, precognitive dreams are providing some insight as to how the program is potentially written in the first place.

In our causality dilemma, where we have a dream preceding physical reality, finding this dream / reality duality becomes very profound, the implications of what this entails may shift our entire physical paradigm into something more idealistic in nature. This becomes very apparent when we start to deconstruct dreaming into a more understandable system.

At the heart of dreaming, there is one observable fact: Dreams are organized thought.

Unlike physical reality where we have atoms, molecules and gravitational forces etc. Dreams are mind-generated thoughts organized into an experience that is similar to how we perceive our physical reality. When you are dreaming and see light, textures and objects, every aspect of the dream environment can be reduced back to thought that has taken on the role of creating many sensory states to render out the dream experience.

There are no atoms, molecules or gravitational forces, everything is thought. Evidence that thought can form audible and visual patterns in our mind stem from self-evident exploration of your own thought process. Sub-vocalization of your voice occurs when you read. It is common to have an internal faint voice sounding out the words within your mind. This is an example of thought taking on the form of sound. Another example is imagining an image in your mind. If you imagine an apple or an orange, you might have a faint visual image in your mind of these objects. If you close your eyes, relax the images can become quite vivid and strong.

Thought has the ability to mimic sensory states and dreaming is a prime example of sub-vocalization and visualization taken to the next level. All the five physical sense can be observed in dreams, and each of them are following the same principles of sub-vocalization. It is organized thought organized into non-verbal thought forms to render your ideas into a virtual reality experience within the dream state.

If dreams are thoughts? How does this apply to a dream that has precognitive potential? It would certainly appear that all the information in a dream is organized thought, more specifically, your thoughts. If this is the case? How is it that something that starts as organize thought, later actualizes into a physical even in your waking reality? This is one of the most challenging questions that the paradox of precognitive dreaming presents.

The nature of the experience suggests that the originating dream is the source of the soon to be actualized reality. Could our thoughts play a role in the organization of information that is later processed and made actual by Tom’s metaphorical Big Computer? Are we in fact creating the precognitive dream in the same manner that we create all our dreams? The implications that stem from precognitive dreaming could change everything we thought we knew about our reality.

Reality may in fact originate from the process of dreams. Dreams may in fact be a reality programing language that later renders into an experience when the dream actualizes and is made real. In the precognitive dream paradox, we know that Physical Reality appeared first in a dream, as organized thought. What makes it different when the dream actualizes? What makes it the same? What are the relationships between these to states by which we observe an experience of reality?

I am not suggesting any answers, but it is hard to dismiss the role of thought within the original dreamed experience. The concept that thought creates reality is a very ancient idea. In the precognitive dream paradox, it may in fact have more merit then not. If we take Tom Campbell’s work at face value and look at the possibility that the origins of the Universe and Reality stem from consciousness and matter originated out of how consciousness organized itself, then precognitive dreaming within consciousness space starts to provide potential evidence of a Universe that is founded on the ideas that consciousness creates.

As some one who has experienced precognitive dreaming, another step up in this experience comes from lucid dreaming. Very few people have written about what lucid precognitive dreaming actually is. Robert Waggoner, the President of the International Association for the Study of Dreams wrote in his book, “Lucid Dreaming: The Gateway to the Inner Self” [17]that there is two types of lucid precognitive dreams: Ambient and Active.

Ambient lucid precognitive dreams are where you be come awake and aware that you are dreaming. You go with the flow of the dream and when the dream actualizes and comes true, you have the self-evidence you need to affirm that you indeed were awake and conscious in a lucid precognitive dream. Active lucid precognitive dreams are where you engage the dream with action based on being lucid and awake. What action you took as a result of this decision making opportunity also actualizes when the dream comes true.

Precognitive dreaming suggests that there is a relationship between dreams and reality; it offers first-person experience with this relationship to those who have precognitive dreams. It suggests that dreams might be a type of reality programming language; a means by which we all collectively are co-creating an objective reality through subjective paradigms using a system of organized thought.

There is that saying, “Thought creates Reality”. This is true for dreams; thought certainly creates dream realities. The real push is to see this working mechanically in real-life examples. It seems to me at least; precognitive dreaming presents this revelation. The implications for this if true; is staggering.

I just wanted to add a footnote: Art Funkhouser contacted me and wanted to say he likes to reserve the term Déjà Rêvé for a dream remembered at the moment of the occurring Déjà experience and if the person remembers the dream clearly prior to the actualization; then it should be simply called a precognitive dream.

It is a bit technical but in his line of research; he deals with a very broad range of “déjà experiences” so the need to be very technical and detailed is apparent.

The other footnote is the use of the term “aura” as it has the unfortunant link to TLE so I want to emphasise for technical purposes that a precognitive dream aura is not at all the TLE or Migrane aura and a scientific classification to distinquish aura types is most likely needed and pending.

He has also provided a link to a form for anyone interesting in submitting their Déjà experiences at: Déjà Vu Survey

He als provided me a link with a lot of information about what Dr. Neppe and Dr. Funkhouser call “déjà experiences” at Welcome to the Déjà Experience Research Website

Author
Ian Wilson
Blog | Facebook Group | Twitter

References

  1. A. T. Funkhouser, Ph.D. (2001) “Perspectives – Vol. 6, No. 1 – Dreams and Deja Vu
  2. Linda Magallón The Lucid Dream Exchange (1994) “Lucid Precognitive Dreams”
  3. Robert Waggoner (2003) “Lucid Dreaming for Precognitive Information
  4. Wikipedia “Epic of Gilgamesh
  5. Aristotle (350BC) “On Prophesying by Dreams
  6. Hugh Evrett Many-Worlds Interpretation (wiki)
  7. Erwin Schrödinger’s cat parodox (wiki)
  8. Stuart Hameroff Official Website
  9. Penrose-Hameroff (2007) The Brain is Both Neurocomputer and Quantum Computer
  10. Penrose-Hameroff (1998)Quantum Computation In Brain Microtubules?
  11. Tom Campbell (2005) “My Big Toe
  12. Brian Witworth (2007) “The Physical World as Virtual Reality
  13. Seth Lloyd “Programming the Universe: A Quantum Computer Scientist Takes On the Cosmos
  14. Stephen Wolfram (1982)”Cellular Automata as Simple Self-Organizing Systems
  15. Max Tegmark “Mathematical universe hypothesis
  16. Double-slit experiment (wiki)
  17. Robert Waggoner “Lucid Dreaming: The Gateway to the Inner Self