Uploaded February 2024 | Updated September 2026, 8 hours ago
Brainworks: The Emergence of Consciousness in Brain, Body and Cosmos
James Beichler
The discipline of psychic studies was converted to parapsychology in 1930 when new lab techniques based on statistics and probability theory were used to explain ESP and similar phenomena of direct mind-to-mind or mind-to-material world contact. But the apparent probabilistic nature of paranormal phenomena reaching whole-brain cognition, though conscious mind of the recipient, is more a factor of intensity of the phenomenon, which depends on the importance of the paranormal signal to the person receiving it. It would normally just remain too weak a signal in the subconscious mind, and therefore, there is nothing probabilistic about the paranormal as thought. Despite the inherent downplay and abridging of the paranormal over the decades, it was bound to make a comeback because the paranormal is real and would not go away. So, new interests in the scientific concept of consciousness merged slowly by the 1970s and thereafter, when physicists became interested in PK phenomena, remote viewing (planned, directed, and purposeful clairvoyance), and other so-called psychic phenomena. They even referred to such phenomena as ‘anomalous’ rather than psychic or paranormal hoping that no one would notice, but changing the name of a thing does not change the thing itself in any way. Studying consciousness instead of the paranormal does not change anything, it just recognizes the truth that what is considered paranormal, including the afterlife and communication with the afterlife, is still a natural feature of consciousness and our world of physical reality.
As more and more scientists in general and physicists, in particular, became interested in consciousness during the last decades of the twentieth century, a new branch of science that brought physics and neurology or neurophysiology together began to develop with graduate degrees offered in the new academic discipline by the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century and labs dedicated to physics of the brain or neurophysics. One side is far too general and hands-on in its reductionistic approach and the other is far too esoteric and flighty, thinking only in the most general of terms, in its approach to understanding the brain and consciousness. That separation of approaches to essentially the same problem all changes below in the following theoretical model of how the brain functions based on a theoretical and a purely physical field-model of life, mind, and consciousness within a more comprehensive and truer physics and context of our experienced material/physical reality.
Professor Beichler has been teaching at the university and college level for more than four decades. He was ABD toward a Ph.D. in the History of Science and earned his Ph.D. in Theoretical Paraphysics in 1999. He has unified all of physics in a single field theory (SOFT) as well as physics of the brain to explain human consciousness and spirituality. He has written and published several books as well as more than seventy articles on these and related subjects.
---
Join this channel to get access to perks:
youtube.com/channel/UCEIXmabw_UhSWTvTS6ftsuA/join
Support the Society’s commitment to maintain an open professional forum for researchers at the edge of conventional science: https://linktr.ee/scientificexploration
The SSE provides a forum for original research into cutting edge and unconventional areas. Views and opinions belong only to the speakers, and are not necessarily endorsed by the SSE.
Brainworks: The Emergence of Consciousness in Brain, Body and Cosmos
James Beichler
The discipline of psychic studies was converted to parapsychology in 1930 when new lab techniques based on statistics and probability theory were used to explain ESP and similar phenomena of direct mind-to-mind or mind-to-material world contact. But the apparent probabilistic nature of paranormal phenomena reaching whole-brain cognition, though conscious mind of the recipient, is more a factor of intensity of the phenomenon, which depends on the importance of the paranormal signal to the person receiving it. It would normally just remain too weak a signal in the subconscious mind, and therefore, there is nothing probabilistic about the paranormal as thought. Despite the inherent downplay and abridging of the paranormal over the decades, it was bound to make a comeback because the paranormal is real and would not go away. So, new interests in the scientific concept of consciousness merged slowly by the 1970s and thereafter, when physicists became interested in PK phenomena, remote viewing (planned, directed, and purposeful clairvoyance), and other so-called psychic phenomena. They even referred to such phenomena as ‘anomalous’ rather than psychic or paranormal hoping that no one would notice, but changing the name of a thing does not change the thing itself in any way. Studying consciousness instead of the paranormal does not change anything, it just recognizes the truth that what is considered paranormal, including the afterlife and communication with the afterlife, is still a natural feature of consciousness and our world of physical reality.
As more and more scientists in general and physicists, in particular, became interested in consciousness during the last decades of the twentieth century, a new branch of science that brought physics and neurology or neurophysiology together began to develop with graduate degrees offered in the new academic discipline by the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century and labs dedicated to physics of the brain or neurophysics. One side is far too general and hands-on in its reductionistic approach and the other is far too esoteric and flighty, thinking only in the most general of terms, in its approach to understanding the brain and consciousness. That separation of approaches to essentially the same problem all changes below in the following theoretical model of how the brain functions based on a theoretical and a purely physical field-model of life, mind, and consciousness within a more comprehensive and truer physics and context of our experienced material/physical reality.
Professor Beichler has been teaching at the university and college level for more than four decades. He was ABD toward a Ph.D. in the History of Science and earned his Ph.D. in Theoretical Paraphysics in 1999. He has unified all of physics in a single field theory (SOFT) as well as physics of the brain to explain human consciousness and spirituality. He has written and published several books as well as more than seventy articles on these and related subjects.
---
Join this channel to get access to perks:
youtube.com/channel/UCEIXmabw_UhSWTvTS6ftsuA/join
Support the Society’s commitment to maintain an open professional forum for researchers at the edge of conventional science: https://linktr.ee/scientificexploration
The SSE provides a forum for original research into cutting edge and unconventional areas. Views and opinions belong only to the speakers, and are not necessarily endorsed by the SSE.









![Replication Study of Causally Ambiguous Duration Sorting | Winthrop T. Williams
Introduction: The “arrow of time” is so fundamental to our present language and logic that we may think we can logically rule out retrocausation when in fact the lack of retrocausation was built into the axioms underlying that logic. In the absence of these presuppositions, the existence of retrocausation may be no more self-contradictory than the claim that retrocausation does not exist. (Kafatos & Nassikas, 2011).
Empirical results have demonstrated a seconds-to-minutes apparently retrocausal effect manifesting as a correlation between the number of photons measured in an optical system and the future duration of that same photon-detection process (Mossbridge, 2019, 2021). This study is an attempt to replicate this effect.
Methods: Hardware and software were developed independently from those of Mossbridge (2019, 2021), but were operated using the same protocol. Briefly, a light source and photon counter were turned on at the beginning of each run, 33 seconds of photon counts were gathered (in 3 11-second cumulative bins), then a quantum-seeded pseudorandom process was used to select the remaining amount of time photons would be counted. After that duration, the light source and photon counter were turned off. Differences in apparatus include photon detection by a single photon counting module (SPCM), pulse counting using a field programmable gate array, random number generation by discrete logic implementation of an 80-bit shift register pseudorandom number generator clocked by muon detections, a LabVIEW program operating the experiment and appending data to a file, and an RC circuit for ramping the detector voltage up and down which is optically isolated from the computer.
Results: Data have been collected from approximately 34000 trials during 1/2 year of continuous operation from July 27, 2020 to Feb 21, 2021 inclusive. Analysis is in progress.
Discussion: “Post Selection” experiments have demonstrated time symmetry in the evolution of quantum-mechanical systems and are congruent with the standard model of quantum physics (Aharonov et al., 2015). Those experiments support the possibility of apparent retrocausation and show a connection between the direction of causality (arrow of entropic time) and the boundary conditions of the system. Conceivably therefore, such a relationship might be turned around creating what one might call a “time telescope” whereby measurements of retrocausal effects allow us to observe boundary conditions that may be distant in time.
References
Aharonov, Y., Cohen, E., Waegell, M., & Elitzur, A. C. (2018) The weak reality that makes q1uantum phenomena more natural: Novel insights and experiments. Entropy (Basel, Switzerland), 20(11), 854. https://doi.org/10.3390/e20110854
Kafatos, M., & Nassikas A. A. (2011). Retro-causation, minimum contradictions and non-locality. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1408, 291. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3663730 Published Online: 18 November 2011.
Mossbridge, J. (2019). The influence of future durations on past photon counts in an optical system. 2019 Annual Meeting of the APS Far West Section, 64(17). https://figshare.com/articles/figure/Future_Photon_Figure_1_pdf/9964976
Mossbridge, J. (2021). Long time-frame causally ambiguous behavior demonstrated in an optical system [In preparation for publication]. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349106030_Long_time-frame_causally_ambiguous_behavior_demonstrated_in_an_optical_system/stats
https://linktr.ee/scientificexploration Replication Study of Causally Ambiguous Duration Sorting | Winthrop T. Williams](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Yh7mVGtorNM/mqdefault.jpg)
