Precognition & Consciousness First Cosmology - Dr. Julia Mossbridge, Institute of Noetic Sciences

Is it possible to view the future before it happens? A buttoned-up academy scientist would probably say no, but Julia Mossbridge, founding executive director of the Institute for Love and Time, would say yes. She comes from a line of scientists who have been willing to dive into the very edges of what can be studied with empirical science, and has come back from the front with stories to tell. We talk about the nature of science, the aggressive reactions in the establishment, how to train precognitive abilities, and much much more.

Or by buying Dr. Mossbridge's books:

As always, let us know what you think in the comments!

00:00 Go!
00:01:52 Big bang or big bust?
00:03:46 Timetables constrain science
00:18:52 The confusion of science and technology
00:29:54 Accuracy of Sight
00:43:44 Other ways of knowing
00:48:42 What is Science?
00:53:35 Social sciences make for an unfair target
01:01:03 Parapsychology and Precognitive Processing
01:07:42 Effect sizes
01:10:33 Is the CIA Instrumentalizing Precognition?
01:16:28 What is the process of training pre-cognitive tasks?
01:23:16 Interpretive capacity, filtering, and missing persons
01:27:39 A Mushroom Story
01:29:58 Modernity, gut feelings, and skepticism
01:36:52 Mechanism
01:49:09 Determinism
01:51:52 Mechanism
01:57:37 Grandmaster Flash's Art Detection
02:00:39 Closing Remarks

#consciousness #cosmology #physics


PODCAST INFO: Anastasia completed her PhD studying bioelectricity at Columbia University. When not talking to brilliant people or making movies, she spends her time painting, reading, and guiding backcountry excursions. Michael Shilo also did his PhD at Columbia studying the elastic properties of molecular water. When he's not in the film studio, he's exploring sound in music. They are both freelance professors at various universities.

SOCIAL:

MUSIC:

[DemystifySci_Podcast]

🧠💪Listen on the go anywhere you find podcasts! Simply search "DemystifySci"

[mszabol]

Great convo! I loved the push back Dr. Mossbridge gave y'all. It illuminated some basic assumptions that different Ontologies take to be fundamental and shone a brighter light on them. For me, the conversation really highlighted the fact that "Science" (with a big S) is something a "Self" does. But rarely do we look at this Self that is doing the Science. Some of the basic assumptions that get glossed over, (often times because one camp or another thinks them absurd), are "What is a Self" and "What is Objective Reality, (Is is Outside of Us or Inside of Us, for instance)" A lot of the "alternative" science group has what I call an "Intuitionist" bent, where the convoluted Math of Quantum is discounted because it doesn't have a corporeal reality. But there consistently seem to be (at least) two realms, the "Bottom Up" Causal world and the "Top Down" Causal world. I think Dr. Mossbridge made some great arguments for why the "Top Down" Causal World is just as important as the "Bottom Up" one, and her point that the two systems have their own rules and cannot be completely described from the other perspective. And that insisting on doing so is of limited utility.

[deepblack]

I like this lady, she challenged you right from the start in amazing ways pushing you further. Awesome

[deepblack]

MEANING comes first!!!! Yes, you're getting there; without meaning there is nothing, nothought, notta.

[starxcrossed]

I like her a lot. She is right about intuition vs analysis and this goes right back to the hemisphere hypothesis

[keithmcgarrigle]

Doing an Einstein. A thought experiment.
My twin brother if possible traveled on average at the speed of light from me for one year.
It would take 1 year to get there, he would be one year older.
Also I aged one year for him to arrive there?
If a half a light year between us, there was an event we both noticed, what is the time difference between us?
Same time?
Newton is right?
Like you both again thank you.

[ivornelsson]

Thanks for yet another interesting video.
“Precognition”: In the Norse Mythology, the wise Mr. Odin has Two Ravens, Hugin and Munin, bringing information from the Past and the Future. I don´t know what the opposite of precognition is called, but there we have both cognitive skills. In this sense, the scientific time-concept connected to “motion of objects” is going both backwards and forwards.

“Mythmaking”: The standing conventional cosmology has become superstitious in its mythmaking by inventing and adding all kinds of dark this and that object, force, and energy, every time it is stuck explaining what really is going on.
A Big Bang idea is contra intuitive by all natural accounts, as it´s made up by having light as a constant, which is isn´t as it´s dispersed and delayed through its path to the telescopes, making the false impression of an expansion when light is taken and calculated as a constant.
In this sense, we have a false mythmaking leading the cosmological science far astray into pure mental constructs.

“Everything”: Our very natural ancestors didn´t differ between a firm physical and a fluent spiritual realm, as they had everything connected.

“Science without meaning” - is meaningless. The ancestral Stories of Creation telling didn´t exclude its individual and tribal meaning and connection to this story. Our deepest ancestral meaning was to follow the seasons and caring for the Earth as the sole provider via the Sun for food, clothing, shelter, and a meaningful social life taking care of each other and nature itself.

It didn´t, as in modern science, divide different areas into several parts which don´t connect to each other and to the whole telling.

An example: Modern science has the fundamental Electromagnetic Force divided into the Electromagnetic Force, and the Weak and Strong electromagnetic force, working in three different scientific branches, and that is nonsensical.

As Julia Mossbridge expressed so precisely in 00:11:38: It hurts the entire science to biasedly differ between what is philosophical science and physical science. Especially as all science is founded on philosophical ponderings in the first place. If holding onto this systematic biased thinking, cosmological science will never develop at all - which it really hasn´t in about a century too.

“Certainty”: 00:13:00. Modern astrophysics and cosmology only knows of 4 % elementary matters in the observable Universe. The rest 96 % is uncertain Dark Matter and Dark Energy, and as long as we don´t have a full consensus Theory of Everything, cosmological science really has very little to be certain of. In this sense, your cosmological ponderings and thoughts are just as valid as everything else, university educated or not.

”Other ways of knowing” 00:43:44: In most ancient tribes, their youngsters took isolated visions quests to find their natural way of INDIVIDUAL developing. Such a quest could lead to a Shamanistic development of gathering cosmological knowledge by traveling by the spirit into other realms and cosmic locations gathering knowledge the INTUITIVE way. In this way, the connection to the wise Mr. Odin and his two ravens is naturally made. This is the "Consciousness First Cosmology" in all its natural elegancy.

About the modern “Artificial Intelligence”: Here we indeed can take the biblical death warning of “Eating from the Tree of Knowledge” very literally. It´s human hybris and on the brink to collective suicide to derail significantly from the natural conditions we´re born into by natural divine cosmic forces.

[Sebreem]

I was please to be introduced to Dr. J within 5 mins of listening to her. What a brilliant presence and mind. She has a unique ability to present the right questions and truths very articulately.

[skrie]

I woke up half way through this conversation and I got really into it. Then after waking properly and some coffee I went and sat down to re-listen the whole thing.. and then I couldn't make heads or tails of it. I guess I really need my sleeping mind when things get complicated.

[JoJo-vgdz]

Very interesting except for the "feminist" bias.
I don't believe that some sciences are more valued because they are led by a majority of men.
That's simplistic.

It's because sciences like sociology and psychology are too subjective.
There are basically as many theories as searchers.
It's a mess.
The predictions are never 100% accurate.
The rate of exceptions is too high to give these sciences the same level of trust as other sciences.
Furthermore, Economics or ufology belongs to this category and most economists or ufologists are men.

So her theory about gender bias is not valid.

[donaldlococo]

Believing one is free from bias is a bias.

[JoJo-vgdz]

Science is the attempt of the mind to solve itself.
Without the mind, there are no problems. 😅

[morphixnm]

I don't think quantum physics is cool because of entanglement and spooky action at a distance. Those mysteries are likely indicators of problems in the theory and/or confusion in the interpretations of the theorists involved.

[advaitrahasya]

A delight to see Julia Mossbridge exhibiting the rarely-seen (because rarely developed) mental capacity for Overview.

Far more useful than the few weak, linear attempts which academia has made at "multi-disciplinary" studies — true Overview is an almost unstudied phenomenon, no doubt because men can get about as good at it as women can get at tennis. Overlapping, but at high levels, things separate out.

And lack of Overview is, of course why the male linear minds of Academic Physicists have been declaring insupportable woo for around a century.

In linear thinking, errors multiply like a tree branching.

So much bad thinking has resulted from dignifying Tweakable Mathematical Models by calling them "theories". A word which implies understanding of mechanism.

The long overdue paradigm shift – the inversion of chronocentric atomism – cannot come from the linear ideas, but it certainly can be managed, taking an Overview on the many linear data points the experimenters have produced.

[MyDavidr]

The Doppler effect will one day be divorced from the propagation of light. It's a juvenile attempt to understand the behavior of light, but it's a step. Similarly, the second grade is a step toward the 3rd grade.

[deepblack]

Ok 1:40:00, the light cone! yes but it's more about the relationships of the various light cones and the inertial coupling across the field, accentuated by the naturally occurring cycles and mental/emotional connections to people and land/objects. We weave a web through the Force, Mind=Space - precognition is the waves of the ocean pointing to where you will meet one day and the situation/sentiment of the action. Hazrat Inyat Kahn and Gurdjieff and the Rosicruscian Orders talk and teach about this. Ghosts and memories are associated with this same level of our field network. Precognition is our Radar looking out to where we our going in the field, what changes are happening in the forward reaches of our time-cone.

[typhvam]

Very interesting and strange talk, the topic is fascinating and her research invaluable but at the same time she does have a very strong ideological lense that seems to colour a lot of her views, it softens with time but the mix of ideology makes me have to take only the objective aspects of the talk into consideration and take a nice pinch of salt with the rest

EIther way fascinating talk, hope you talk with her again and she is a bit less... judgmental? the information itself is great
With ESP i've had enough experiences to have some openness towards it, nothing ever entirely convincing but enough to have curiosity.

Keep up the great work! But be careful with ideology, "soviet science" is what happens when scientific endeavor becomes too influenced by ideologies reactionary to enlightenment, and we all know how that went....

[danmoretti]

Dang what a fantastic conversation. Great Christmas present for me haha. Thanks for this!

[Nalhek]

I'm gonna be really disappointed if all the esoteric nicnacs were only brought out specifically for this guest. This needs to be a consistent thing; #makesciencewooagain

[keithmcgarrigle]

Mother nature will show the facts, if we keep an open mind without some scientists corupting our education?
As a 69 old I am still learning, but will not believe any thing in a book, or one view point without treble thinking if it is correct?
As a retired electrical engineer when training other engineers, and apprentices. I would request them to discuss what ever information I gave them with other engineers, or Google it?