Latest / INSPIRE STORY / #0256_ Something Unexplainable Was Captured by Apple Vision Pro — What Did They Really See?

Transcript

#0256_ Something Unexplainable Was Captured by Apple Vision Pro — What Did They Really See? · INSPIRE STORY

0:05
Speaker 1: Danny guler welcome to the show man sean thank you
0:08
Speaker 1: so much for having me my pleasure so had chase
0:13
Speaker 1: hughes on and he brought up this uh laser dmt
0:16
Speaker 1: kind of experiment i don't even know what we call
0:19
Speaker 1: it but really caught my attention love chase hughes too
0:22
Speaker 1: by the.
0:23
Speaker 2: Way he's a great guy he's a good friend yeah.
0:25
Speaker 1: And then uh And then we had this reel that
0:27
Speaker 1: like went viral about the DMT laser thing. And, uh,
0:31
Speaker 1: our mutual friend, Rich, I'll leave his last name out
0:35
Speaker 1: of it, but he texted me right away. He's like,
0:37
Speaker 1: Holy shit, you know, Danny. And I was like, no,
0:39
Speaker 1: I don't. And he's like, you gotta meet him. And, um,
0:44
Speaker 1: so dude, I'm, I'm, uh, stoked you're here.
0:46
Speaker 2: Thank you so much for having me. I appreciate that.
0:48
Speaker 1: My pleasure. My pleasure. But, um, Yeah, let me start
0:52
Speaker 1: you off with an introduction because I know once we
0:55
Speaker 1: get into this thing, it's just going to go.
0:57
Speaker 2: This is water, right?
0:59
Speaker 1: That's water. Danny Guler, you're an independent researcher and the
1:04
Speaker 1: founder of Code of Reality, an interdisciplinary initiative exploring what
1:09
Speaker 1: you call cognitive physics, the intersection where mind and matter meet.
1:15
Speaker 1: Through Code of Reality, you bring together scientists, philosophers, technologists,
1:20
Speaker 1: and indigenous wisdom keepers to investigate the relationship between consciousness
1:25
Speaker 1: and the nature of reality. Ultimately, your goal is to
1:29
Speaker 1: advance a more holistic science of consciousness, one that can
1:34
Speaker 1: exist alongside and compliment mainstream physics. It's going to be
1:39
Speaker 1: an awesome interview. So before we get started, a couple
1:44
Speaker 1: of things real quick. Everybody gets a gift.
1:47
Speaker 2: Let's go. Thank you so much.
1:48
Speaker 1: Vigilance Elite gummy bears. There's no DMT in those, unfortunately. Oh.
1:53
Speaker 1: But they are legal in all 50 states.
1:55
Speaker 2: Thank you.
1:56
Speaker 1: And made in Michigan. And then I have a Patreon account.
2:01
Speaker 1: You familiar with Patreon?
2:02
Speaker 2: Of course, yeah. I have a little YouTube channel. So yeah,
2:04
Speaker 2: I also have a little Patreon.
2:06
Speaker 1: Oh, nice. So Patreon, they're the reason I get to
2:10
Speaker 1: sit down here with you today. And they've been with
2:13
Speaker 1: us since the beginning. So they get the opportunity to
2:15
Speaker 1: ask every single guest a question.
2:17
Speaker 2: Sure thing.
2:19
Speaker 1: So this is from JB. Christians believe there are angels
2:23
Speaker 1: and demons among us. Some people claim to have seen them.
2:27
Speaker 1: Is there any evidence in your research with DMT that
2:30
Speaker 1: this spirit realm exists? And do you believe in angels
2:34
Speaker 1: and demons?
2:36
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a great question. The short answer is yes.
2:45
Speaker 2: But I don't think that the nature of those is
2:47
Speaker 2: as straightforward as people think. It's clear to me at
2:51
Speaker 2: this point that way more exists than just the realm
2:54
Speaker 2: that we're perceiving. And for religious people, this is not
2:58
Speaker 2: a surprise because they do believe that there's a realm beyond.
3:00
Speaker 2: And in fact, this whole life is some form of
3:05
Speaker 2: getting into the right place with the right people. So
3:11
Speaker 2: I think that with DMT, it's a little bit more
3:14
Speaker 2: surprising than people would expect because what you see is
3:16
Speaker 2: not necessarily the kind of, classical, you know, demonic versus angelic.
3:22
Speaker 2: It's more like a very large array of species that
3:25
Speaker 2: you experience. And you can, it doesn't always happen. But
3:30
Speaker 2: if you do, then there's all kinds, including what I
3:33
Speaker 2: guess you would call demonic and angelic. I've experienced both,
3:37
Speaker 2: by the way.
3:37
Speaker 1: Really? So, yeah.
3:38
Speaker 2: But you also have the insectoids, the reptilians, the jokers.
3:46
Speaker 2: There's all kinds of, and they're very clearly distinct from
3:49
Speaker 2: one another. So they're very different. But yes, that demonic
3:56
Speaker 2: part and the angelic part, they're also there. I would say, though,
3:59
Speaker 2: that one of the things that I've seen is that
4:01
Speaker 2: they actually coexist, so to speak. So it's almost like
4:04
Speaker 2: if you want to use like a very dumbed down
4:08
Speaker 2: kind of example, if they're going to work on a bus,
4:12
Speaker 2: they're all kind of like just sitting together. Like there's
4:14
Speaker 2: no like segregation in that way. But everybody are still
4:18
Speaker 2: following some rules. Sometimes somebody's trying to break the rules,
4:22
Speaker 2: but even what you would call the demonic entities, we
4:26
Speaker 2: just had some conversation about this with your crew about
4:28
Speaker 2: like sleep paralysis, for example, where people feel like a
4:32
Speaker 2: demon is sitting on their chest or something like this, right?
4:36
Speaker 2: Or a witch or something like this. And I was
4:38
Speaker 2: saying that very often if you have these like darker experiences,
4:41
Speaker 2: especially if you're a religious person, You can set up
4:44
Speaker 2: a very clear boundary. You can say things like, in
4:47
Speaker 2: the name of Jesus Christ, I'm setting a boundary right
4:50
Speaker 2: here or in my body, and nothing is allowed. But
4:52
Speaker 2: you have to state it. So you have to invoke
4:54
Speaker 2: the boundary, and you have to be clear about that.
4:57
Speaker 2: The second you do that, something happens. It's almost like
4:59
Speaker 2: they're incapable of entering it anymore, or they're not allowed to,
5:03
Speaker 2: to such a degree that it's almost like nobody wants
5:06
Speaker 2: to find out what happens if you cross that line.
5:09
Speaker 2: So I would say that, yes, I've seen that kind
5:13
Speaker 2: of stuff. But at the same time, there are things
5:15
Speaker 2: that we can be in relationship to. They can actually
5:18
Speaker 2: create a very clear boundary between us and it because
5:21
Speaker 2: the agency, the importance of the sovereignty of every free
5:27
Speaker 2: agent in existence is basically almost like a holy thing.
5:31
Speaker 2: Like nothing can ever penetrate that boundary. So I don't
5:34
Speaker 2: know if that answers the question.
5:35
Speaker 1: Wow, that's interesting. What were the... I wasn't planning on
5:39
Speaker 1: going into all this right off the bat, but you'd
5:41
Speaker 1: mentioned angelic, demonic, then something else, then reptilians, and then something.
5:47
Speaker 2: Insectoids, reptilians, yeah.
5:48
Speaker 1: What are insectoids? Hold on. What is that?
5:51
Speaker 2: Yeah, so this is where, if we're going to, this
5:55
Speaker 2: is not how I would introduce the topic for sure,
5:58
Speaker 2: but we're doing this for Patreon, right?
5:59
Speaker 1: This is for... Well, do you want to go into
6:02
Speaker 1: it later?
6:03
Speaker 2: Just because that, if you start there, I think it will,
6:08
Speaker 2: turn a lot of people off because it's way too
6:10
Speaker 2: deep immediately and people are like, it's just too crazy
6:13
Speaker 2: for them.
6:14
Speaker 1: Let's save it. Yeah, let's save it.
6:15
Speaker 2: We'll get there.
6:16
Speaker 1: So, okay, let's start it off. How did you get
6:21
Speaker 1: introduced to DMT?
6:24
Speaker 2: I was looking for it. So I was already a
6:26
Speaker 2: very experienced psychonaut. Not something I recommend anyone does, but
6:31
Speaker 2: I started doing like acid when I was 11. And
6:35
Speaker 2: then I never, yeah, I was a wild kid. And
6:38
Speaker 2: I did it throughout my life quite a bit. And
6:41
Speaker 2: then by the time I was in 2010, that's when
6:46
Speaker 2: I found DMT for the first time. So like I found,
6:48
Speaker 2: I heard about it, I think 2006 or something. I
6:51
Speaker 2: heard it was a Joe Rogan rant on some Ohio
6:55
Speaker 2: radio show. It was before he had the show or anything.
6:58
Speaker 2: And he was just raving about it. And I was like,
7:00
Speaker 2: what is that? Like I've done so many psychedelics. I've
7:04
Speaker 2: never heard of DMT. I had to find out because
7:06
Speaker 2: there was a line that Joe said that grabbed my
7:10
Speaker 2: attention beyond anything. He said, it doesn't feel like you're
7:13
Speaker 2: in another dimension. You are in another dimension. And I
7:17
Speaker 2: knew exactly what he meant by that. I was like, okay,
7:20
Speaker 2: I got to find out whatever that is. And I
7:22
Speaker 2: tried to find it, couldn't find it. I lived in
7:25
Speaker 2: Indianapolis back then. I tried to make it, not very successfully.
7:31
Speaker 2: And then only when I arrived in California is when
7:34
Speaker 2: I managed to actually find it finally. And then I
7:37
Speaker 2: tried and tried and tried. Actually, it didn't work for
7:39
Speaker 2: me like 10 times. And I kept on trying. And
7:42
Speaker 2: back in the day, it was a pretty gnarly thing
7:46
Speaker 2: to do because you didn't have the luxury of like
7:48
Speaker 2: vape pens and things like this. It was just like
7:50
Speaker 2: basically a crack pipe. And you just smoked this thing.
7:53
Speaker 2: It was like smoking glass. It was awful. And eventually
7:58
Speaker 2: it worked. And sure enough, it delivered on every front.
8:01
Speaker 2: So to anybody who doesn't know, DMT stands for dimethyltryptamine.
8:06
Speaker 2: And it's essentially a neuromodulator that a lot of living
8:08
Speaker 2: things have, including humans.
8:11
Speaker 1: We make it.
8:11
Speaker 2: So our lungs make it. Some portions of your brain
8:14
Speaker 2: synthesize it. And if you smoke it, so if you
8:19
Speaker 2: take more into your system, it produces an effect that
8:23
Speaker 2: doesn't feel like the effect of a drug. Because in
8:26
Speaker 2: every substance that you use, alcohol, weed, doesn't matter, You
8:30
Speaker 2: feel that something is being done to the machinery of
8:32
Speaker 2: your psychology. Like you're changing, clearly. Like you feel different, right?
8:36
Speaker 2: With DMT, it doesn't really feel like that. You're not changing.
8:40
Speaker 2: The world is. Completely. In such ways that really begs
8:46
Speaker 2: the question whether what you're seeing is a hallucination or
8:49
Speaker 2: actually coming from somewhere. The realism of it is not
8:53
Speaker 2: something you're familiar with. And that is why it captivates
8:58
Speaker 2: so much of so many people's imagination around the world,
9:01
Speaker 2: including scientists who are now studying the substance under the
9:04
Speaker 2: question of whether it's actually real. So, you know, as
9:07
Speaker 2: a small side tangent, most psychedelic research revolves around the
9:13
Speaker 2: question of therapy, right? Therapeutic, like, can you get over addiction, PTSD,
9:18
Speaker 2: things like this. But DMT specifically, NNDMT, is being studied
9:23
Speaker 2: through the lens of wait a second, are we interacting
9:28
Speaker 2: with an actual place? So that's, that's the front and
9:31
Speaker 2: center question in some of the research programs, like the
9:34
Speaker 2: Imperial college in London. So this is being taken seriously.
9:38
Speaker 2: And I've actually, I just came from a conference in
9:40
Speaker 2: LA where, uh, Andrew Gallimore, Dr. Andrew Gallimore, who's kind
9:44
Speaker 2: of the, one of the more known, uh, psychedelic researchers
9:47
Speaker 2: as a neuroscientist and a, a computational, uh, neuropharmacologist. Um, and, um,
9:55
Speaker 2: And Donald Hoffman. I don't know if you've heard of
9:56
Speaker 2: Donald Hoffman.
9:58
Speaker 1: Sounds familiar.
9:58
Speaker 2: Yeah, so he's the guy who basically grokked this way
10:02
Speaker 2: of investigating consciousness from a mathematical perspective. And his claim
10:07
Speaker 2: is that when we look at the mathematical models, modeling
10:13
Speaker 2: agents in any environment, we discover that there is no
10:17
Speaker 2: way that agents are aware of the world for what
10:19
Speaker 2: it really is. And he found a mathematical framework to
10:23
Speaker 2: describe consciousness and they just collaborated. It felt like an
10:26
Speaker 2: inflection in history because they use psychedelics as a test
10:32
Speaker 2: case where they can test Donald Hoffman's theories. Basically there's
10:37
Speaker 2: something they call, I think it's called a experience kernel,
10:40
Speaker 2: which is basically a mathematical object that you can basically
10:42
Speaker 2: kind of spin around and it contains, it contains, other
10:48
Speaker 2: mathematical object called trace logic, which is basic. And what
10:52
Speaker 2: they're showing is that by changing the, if I understood
10:56
Speaker 2: it correctly, by changing the experience kernel, you can determine
11:01
Speaker 2: or predict what kind of an experience people could have.
11:04
Speaker 2: So they're now using psychedelics to test this. So this
11:08
Speaker 2: has been taken seriously by very prominent known scientists. And
11:15
Speaker 2: it's encouraging because up until maybe a decade ago, this
11:18
Speaker 2: was considered just fringe thinking, insanity, you know, and now
11:23
Speaker 2: all of a sudden it's being taken a lot more seriously.
11:25
Speaker 1: Wow. Yeah. What is the, I mean, I've done 5-MeO DMT,
11:30
Speaker 1: I've done psilocybin, Ibogaine, MDMA. You're pretty experienced. I think
11:34
Speaker 1: that's it. I've never done DMT or anything other than
11:39
Speaker 1: 5-MeO DMT. What is the, have you done 5-MeO?
11:43
Speaker 2: The first thing to say is that you've done the top.
11:46
Speaker 2: I don't think you can have a bigger experience than 5MEO.
11:49
Speaker 2: It's as big as it gets. You're basically in the
11:52
Speaker 2: presence of something divine and you're being washed over with
11:55
Speaker 2: this ocean of white light and you just fully dissolve.
11:59
Speaker 2: But with DMT, even though it's also big, I wouldn't
12:03
Speaker 2: say it's as.
12:05
Speaker 2: It can be, but it's not as hard-hitting as 5MEO.
12:08
Speaker 2: But it's surprising in a different way. It can be
12:10
Speaker 2: shocking in a different way in that you experience a
12:14
Speaker 2: lot of new content. So just like you wake up
12:18
Speaker 2: from a dream, let's say a very realistic dream, and
12:21
Speaker 2: in the dream you were convinced that you knew that
12:24
Speaker 2: person or you had that job or whatever it is
12:26
Speaker 2: that you were doing. Then you wake up and you go, oh, wait, right,
12:29
Speaker 2: that was a dream. Okay, well, imagine that one level
12:33
Speaker 2: up from this. Imagine waking up from here and going, wait, what? Like, oh, right,
12:39
Speaker 2: that was a dream. But for real, imagine that for real.
12:42
Speaker 2: So that's kind of like what DMT feels like. So
12:45
Speaker 2: it's very shocking. And also the content you experience is
12:50
Speaker 2: very weird. It's of a kind that you didn't even
12:54
Speaker 2: know was possible to experience. So it can be shocking
12:58
Speaker 2: in that regard. But it's a very different kind of
13:02
Speaker 2: experience than 5.0.
13:03
Speaker 1: Interesting. So I know you've discussed this probably a thousand
13:08
Speaker 1: times by now, but How did the laser, I mean,
13:12
Speaker 1: the whole reason that you caught my attention was Chase
13:15
Speaker 1: Hughes talking about on DMT, you can shine a red
13:19
Speaker 1: laser on a wall and you'll see code. And then
13:22
Speaker 1: you can look through the laser through different angles and
13:26
Speaker 1: see more code. Yeah. And as you move the laser,
13:31
Speaker 1: it moves on to different code. And I was watching
13:35
Speaker 1: some of your stuff earlier and it's, Somebody was describing
13:38
Speaker 1: it like a flashlight. Like if you shine a flashlight
13:41
Speaker 1: on the wall, you would just see code. But it's there,
13:46
Speaker 1: but it's not there. And you've had, I think, over 2,000
13:49
Speaker 1: people witness the same thing.
13:51
Speaker 2: At this point, it's thousands, yeah. So the way I
13:55
Speaker 2: arrived at it, there's a movie that we're going to be... Well,
13:57
Speaker 2: we're already at the end of it, so we're in
13:59
Speaker 2: the process of selling it now. It's called The Discovery
14:03
Speaker 2: by Aaron Vanden, the director. Huge shout out to Aaron.
14:05
Speaker 2: He's incredible. And so the full story is going to
14:09
Speaker 2: be in that movie. But the general gist of it
14:13
Speaker 2: was that I've had a certain kind of experience, even
14:16
Speaker 2: though everything I just told you about DMT, I've had
14:19
Speaker 2: a kind of experience on it that was even more
14:21
Speaker 2: real than that. In that it was just a being
14:24
Speaker 2: that appeared in front of me or to the side
14:26
Speaker 2: of me, as real as you, but he was like
14:29
Speaker 2: this hybrid between like some kind of an amphibian, a
14:33
Speaker 2: frog or a lizard or something like a combination. But
14:36
Speaker 2: just take yourself through this for a second, right? If
14:39
Speaker 2: you're willing to just follow me there and not kind of,
14:43
Speaker 2: because there's always these assumptions, right? If a person doesn't
14:46
Speaker 2: know who I am, like who knows why people tell
14:49
Speaker 2: you what they tell you, right? They confabulate, they lie,
14:51
Speaker 2: who knows, right? But if you're willing to follow me there,
14:54
Speaker 2: just imagine what it would be like to all of
14:56
Speaker 2: a sudden this happened to you. Like an alien appears
14:59
Speaker 2: right next to you as real as a person and
15:03
Speaker 2: nothing else is happening. There's no like, psychedelic explosion none
15:06
Speaker 2: of that i mean at that moment i just i
15:10
Speaker 2: was like oh my like like i really did it
15:14
Speaker 2: this time right and then he showed me how to
15:18
Speaker 2: play chords on a guitar that i didn't know how
15:20
Speaker 2: to do so essentially he was telling me i'm real
15:24
Speaker 2: because i'm giving you information you don't have currently you
15:27
Speaker 2: don't know how to play these chords i'm telling you
15:29
Speaker 2: how to do that So I knew that in that moment,
15:32
Speaker 2: I knew that nothing will ever be the same again,
15:34
Speaker 2: because I knew that even though I can't really prove
15:36
Speaker 2: this to anyone right now, for me, I know for
15:39
Speaker 2: a fact that this is not a hallucination. It can't be.
15:42
Speaker 2: It's so specific. It's so realistic. And he's giving me
15:45
Speaker 2: information that I don't have. Now the journey became, how
15:50
Speaker 2: do I prove this to others? How do we talk
15:54
Speaker 2: about this in a way that science can actually get
15:56
Speaker 2: its hands on? Because science deals with things that are
15:59
Speaker 2: measurable and repeatable. So then for years I spent trying
16:03
Speaker 2: to figure out how that can be done. So there
16:05
Speaker 2: was all kinds of ways in which I was thinking
16:08
Speaker 2: about it, but I figured, okay, because the problem seems
16:11
Speaker 2: to be so insurmountable, we have to think from the
16:14
Speaker 2: most fundamental principles we can. So almost like a physicist.
16:17
Speaker 2: And I thought, okay, what do I know? I know
16:20
Speaker 2: that light is involved because I can see the content
16:23
Speaker 2: with my eyes. Now, obviously the brain is involved a lot,
16:26
Speaker 2: but what is happening with light that carries that information
16:30
Speaker 2: to me, right? And then I thought, what else do
16:33
Speaker 2: we know? We know that if the space is real,
16:35
Speaker 2: like existing on its own side, that means it must
16:39
Speaker 2: have a geometry, it must have a topology, it must
16:41
Speaker 2: have rules, its own laws of physics, even if they're
16:43
Speaker 2: not our laws of physics. And then for some reason,
16:46
Speaker 2: I had this very strong intuition that told me that
16:48
Speaker 2: there has to be a boundary because we sometimes see it,
16:52
Speaker 2: sometimes we don't see it, right? So that fact alone,
16:54
Speaker 2: this binary tells me that we penetrate some kind of
16:57
Speaker 2: a boundary somewhere. And I was interested in that boundary.
17:01
Speaker 2: I asked myself, can we find that boundary? Because my
17:06
Speaker 2: intuition was that even though a lot of people report
17:08
Speaker 2: similar things on DMT, very often people report the same
17:12
Speaker 2: beings or something like this. But how do you really
17:15
Speaker 2: know it's the same? My question was, can we in
17:18
Speaker 2: real time reliably see the same thing, like at the
17:22
Speaker 2: same time? And that was my guiding question. And it
17:25
Speaker 2: took me years. I didn't really arrive at it right away.
17:28
Speaker 2: I tried all kinds of things. I read a bunch
17:29
Speaker 2: of papers. I was thinking about it. And eventually, through
17:32
Speaker 2: a very kind of this windy road, I somehow arrived
17:36
Speaker 2: at this conclusion that somehow diffraction, diffracted light, diffracted laser,
17:41
Speaker 2: is supposed to do something. I wasn't even sure what.
17:44
Speaker 2: But I tried it. And here it was. There was
17:47
Speaker 2: literally like a code that is running in the surface.
17:50
Speaker 2: It's on every single surface. When people see it, they
17:52
Speaker 2: immediately get shocked because you don't even need a grant
17:56
Speaker 2: or a study or anyone else to see it. The
17:59
Speaker 2: second you see it, it's as real as this bottle
18:02
Speaker 2: right there. Like it's just there and it's very clear
18:04
Speaker 2: to you. And that realism is what you were describing.
18:07
Speaker 2: Like when you move the light, it's moving around. Just
18:09
Speaker 2: like you would, you know, put a flashlight in the
18:12
Speaker 2: dark and just reveal an object basically. So that's essentially
18:17
Speaker 2: how I got to it. And it took me about,
18:19
Speaker 2: I would say about five years, six years, the whole process.
18:25
Speaker 1: I need you to stop what you're doing for a
18:27
Speaker 1: second and really listen. If someone relies on your income
18:31
Speaker 1: and you don't have life insurance yet, this needs to
18:33
Speaker 1: move to the top of your list. I've had to
18:35
Speaker 1: think about that myself, making sure my family isn't left
18:39
Speaker 1: dealing with everything if something happens to me. Fabric by
18:42
Speaker 1: Gerber Life is term life insurance you can get done today.
18:46
Speaker 1: Made for busy parents like you, all online, on your schedule,
18:50
Speaker 1: right from your couch. You could be covered in under
18:53
Speaker 1: 10 minutes, often with no health exam required. If you've
18:57
Speaker 1: got kids, especially if you're young and healthy, this is
19:01
Speaker 1: when locking in a lower rate actually matters. And Fabric
19:05
Speaker 1: has flexible, high-quality policies that fit your family and your budget.
19:10
Speaker 1: Even something like a million dollars in coverage for less
19:14
Speaker 1: than a dollar a day, or more or less, depending
19:16
Speaker 1: on your needs. They've also partnered with Gerber Life, which
19:20
Speaker 1: has been trusted by families for decades. And Fabric gives
19:24
Speaker 1: you more than just a policy, things like free digital
19:28
Speaker 1: wills and tools to plan ahead for your kids, all
19:32
Speaker 1: right from your phone. Join the thousands of parents who
19:34
Speaker 1: trust Fabric to help protect their family. Apply today in
19:37
Speaker 1: just minutes at meetfabric.com slash shot. Meatfabric.com slash Sean. And
19:43
Speaker 1: use my link so they know I sent you. M-E-E-T fabric.com
19:48
Speaker 1: slash Sean. Policies issued by Western Southern Life Assurance Company.
19:51
Speaker 1: Not available in certain states. Price is subject to underwriting
19:54
Speaker 1: and health questions. What do you mean it took five
19:59
Speaker 1: years to six years?
20:00
Speaker 2: Of thinking about it. Like I didn't figure out right away.
20:03
Speaker 2: I was thinking about this for years and years and years.
20:05
Speaker 2: I was trying to figure it out.
20:07
Speaker 1: When's the first time you saw it?
20:09
Speaker 2: Uh, 2019, I think.
20:12
Speaker 1: Well, how can you describe that?
20:15
Speaker 2: The seeing it? So it was, uh, well maybe 2020,
20:18
Speaker 2: I don't remember exactly. I should probably go and look
20:20
Speaker 2: at my pictures cause I have everything's catalog. Um, so
20:25
Speaker 2: it was basically, and actually my, my now wife was
20:28
Speaker 2: instrumental in figuring it out. So there's, this is where
20:31
Speaker 2: it kind of gets into this a little murky territory
20:33
Speaker 2: because whenever I tell this part of the story, a
20:36
Speaker 2: lot of my friends who are actual scientists, always encourage
20:40
Speaker 2: me to remove this part of the story. They say, Danny,
20:44
Speaker 2: I love you, but the second you tell me this,
20:46
Speaker 2: I didn't say it yet, but I'm just prefacing this
20:48
Speaker 2: part with this. They say, I just stopped listening to you.
20:51
Speaker 2: I can't listen to this because it's just, you just
20:55
Speaker 2: sound like a madman at that point. But I can't
20:58
Speaker 2: pretend like that's not how it happened. So that's what
21:01
Speaker 2: it was. Signs started appearing. Just literally like I would
21:07
Speaker 2: walk in, there would be this number that appears on
21:10
Speaker 2: the ground, right when I'm thinking about this, a very
21:12
Speaker 2: specific number. And I would like put it into a
21:15
Speaker 2: spotlight on a Mac and it would match a physics
21:17
Speaker 2: paper that matches the subject matter that I was thinking about.
21:20
Speaker 2: It was just like these wild things. And obviously I knew.
21:24
Speaker 1: You mean this is before you saw it?
21:27
Speaker 2: This is what, yeah, yeah. This is, I'm telling you
21:28
Speaker 2: like how I got to it, right? So the day
21:31
Speaker 2: that I saw it was through this chain of causation
21:34
Speaker 2: where I started seeing these little signs that kind of
21:38
Speaker 2: led me to it. And it was coupled with me
21:40
Speaker 2: thinking about it logically, obviously, but there was like a
21:42
Speaker 2: lot of kind of help, right? The kind of somebody
21:44
Speaker 2: was kind of guiding me towards it. So the day
21:48
Speaker 2: I figured it out, I was with my wife and
21:50
Speaker 2: one of these synchronistic moments happened to both of us.
21:54
Speaker 2: At the same time?
21:55
Speaker 1: The what? At the same time? Yes.
21:58
Speaker 2: So basically I told her about it before, just like
21:59
Speaker 2: I'm telling you now. And even though you're open to
22:02
Speaker 2: hear me out, Really, until you see it for yourself,
22:06
Speaker 2: it's just kind of like, cool story, bro. Who knows, right?
22:10
Speaker 2: So she was obviously in the same camp. I told
22:12
Speaker 2: her what was happening, but she's like, okay, what can
22:15
Speaker 2: I do with this, right? But then something happened to
22:17
Speaker 2: both of us, so she got shocked. She was like, oh,
22:21
Speaker 2: my God. I was like, yeah, I told you. It's
22:23
Speaker 2: really happening. And I cataloged all of this. And then
22:27
Speaker 2: she immediately, you know, changed and she was like, okay, okay, okay.
22:31
Speaker 2: Show me what you were telling me. Cause she wasn't
22:33
Speaker 2: really listening before. She was like, okay, now show me
22:35
Speaker 2: what you were telling me. And I started showing her
22:37
Speaker 2: all the papers that I found, all that stuff. And
22:40
Speaker 2: actually together we arrived at this conclusion. So then when I,
22:44
Speaker 2: when I figured out that the laser has something to
22:46
Speaker 2: do with it, it was doing COVID. So you couldn't
22:48
Speaker 2: really order a laser anywhere. You couldn't just go to
22:50
Speaker 2: Amazon and buy a laser. You had the only place
22:53
Speaker 2: ironically you can get a laser from was China, but
22:56
Speaker 2: you know, all the ports were closed. So it was
22:59
Speaker 2: this dramatic, like, you know, it kept on like being
23:03
Speaker 2: almost like receding from me, right? So I ordered the laser,
23:05
Speaker 2: the only one I could find. And it was the
23:07
Speaker 2: one that you had to like solder a circuit for.
23:09
Speaker 2: And it arrived like three months later because of the,
23:13
Speaker 2: you know, all the COVID stuff. So it arrived. I
23:17
Speaker 2: do the soldering. I turn it on. I smoke DMT.
23:23
Speaker 2: There's code on the wall. And I'm looking at this
23:26
Speaker 2: and I'm looking at my wife and I go, there's
23:29
Speaker 2: a code on the wall. And she goes, what do
23:32
Speaker 2: you mean? I said, well, I said the words in English.
23:36
Speaker 2: So like, there's a code in the wall. That's literally
23:38
Speaker 2: what I'm saying. And she said, I don't understand. And
23:41
Speaker 2: I guess I get it later. I understood that the
23:43
Speaker 2: reason she doesn't understand is because, I mean, you're on DMT.
23:46
Speaker 2: So all kinds of shit can happen, right? But what
23:49
Speaker 2: I think I couldn't communicate at the time to her
23:53
Speaker 2: was it wasn't like a hallucination. It was just there.
23:56
Speaker 2: It was like a real thing there. which is very
23:59
Speaker 2: different than how the visuals of DMT usually happen. And
24:03
Speaker 2: I had so much experience with DMT that I immediately
24:05
Speaker 2: noticed that there's a big difference between what we usually
24:07
Speaker 2: see on DMT and that. So then of course, the
24:11
Speaker 2: first thing on the agenda was to show all the people.
24:13
Speaker 2: So I started showing people. I showed it to good
24:15
Speaker 2: friends of mine. Everybody started seeing the same thing and
24:19
Speaker 2: everybody was shocked. And then is when I got shocked
24:23
Speaker 2: because until that moment, I still had that possibility in
24:25
Speaker 2: my head where, oh, who knows, maybe it's like a
24:29
Speaker 2: mild schizophrenia or something, you know, like maybe I'm just like,
24:33
Speaker 2: you know, numbers are talking to me, you know, things
24:35
Speaker 2: like this. It's like, it's very kind of like delusions
24:38
Speaker 2: of grandeur. What are the chances of somebody making a
24:41
Speaker 2: discovery of this kind, right?
24:43
Speaker 1: Zero.
24:44
Speaker 2: But all of a sudden others reporting the same thing.
24:46
Speaker 2: And I was like, yo, what is going on? So
24:50
Speaker 2: then after about person 80, I decided it's time to
24:55
Speaker 2: email a scientist. So actually, I emailed Donald Hoffman. And
24:59
Speaker 2: it was just coming out from a medical procedure. And
25:02
Speaker 2: he was gracious enough to send me all the emails
25:04
Speaker 2: of his PhD students and stuff like that. And in
25:06
Speaker 2: my head, it was like, no, no, no, no, I
25:08
Speaker 2: need to talk to him. But anyways, I just, you know,
25:11
Speaker 2: emailed a few scientists. For the obvious reasons, it wasn't
25:14
Speaker 2: very successful, because I'm not surprised because I don't have,
25:19
Speaker 2: I'm not a scientist, I don't have scientific accolades running
25:22
Speaker 2: in front of me.
25:23
Speaker 1: Who are you? Right?
25:24
Speaker 2: And what do you email me about that you found
25:26
Speaker 2: there's a code in the wall? Get out of here
25:28
Speaker 2: with this, right? So and I understand. So I said, Okay, well,
25:32
Speaker 2: the one thing I do know how to do a
25:33
Speaker 2: little bit is put out content. So I started talking
25:36
Speaker 2: about this online. And then all of a sudden, everybody
25:41
Speaker 2: got interested. I was invited to speak on the subject.
25:44
Speaker 2: And slowly I polished the message. And as it was happening,
25:48
Speaker 2: you know, more and more people got involved, some scientists
25:50
Speaker 2: stepped into the picture, My now partner, David Carter, emailed
25:54
Speaker 2: me and he was like, hey, man. He started a
25:57
Speaker 2: conversation by, you don't know me, but I've been following
26:00
Speaker 2: you for a while. I love those ones. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
26:07
Speaker 2: But he was, you know, I felt that it was
26:09
Speaker 2: like a very good vibe person. And he's very known
26:13
Speaker 2: in the kind of like the technology development world and
26:16
Speaker 2: also crypto and all that stuff. So he said when
26:18
Speaker 2: he was going to these conferences, invariably at the end
26:23
Speaker 2: of these conferences, there's always this one pocket of the
26:28
Speaker 2: event where everybody kind of, you know, whip out their
26:30
Speaker 2: wildest cards. They're kind of like, hey, check this out. Like,
26:33
Speaker 2: did you hear about this? So in that period of
26:36
Speaker 2: the conference, he would always pull out a laser because
26:39
Speaker 2: he tried it and he saw it and he was like, dude,
26:41
Speaker 2: that's crazy. So he pulled out the laser and showed
26:44
Speaker 2: people the laser. And I was like, wait, what do
26:50
Speaker 2: you mean? Like, but they're not smoking. So what's the
26:52
Speaker 2: point of the laser? And that's when I knew Carter's
26:55
Speaker 2: kind of brilliance because he's all about, he calls it
26:58
Speaker 2: lowering the angle or building a bridge. And what he
27:00
Speaker 2: means is he explained to me, well, look, here's the deal.
27:04
Speaker 2: If I just tell them there's this guy who discovered
27:08
Speaker 2: this thing and then there's a laser and you got
27:11
Speaker 2: to smoke the empty, look how many things here that
27:13
Speaker 2: they have to imagine, right? But if I just take
27:16
Speaker 2: a laser and just put it on a wall, I
27:19
Speaker 2: remove two of those. I just told them, here's the thing.
27:22
Speaker 2: Just look at it. You see this laser?
27:24
Speaker 1: Great.
27:25
Speaker 2: Now, if you smoke DMT right now, that's what you
27:27
Speaker 2: would tell them, you will see code running in there.
27:30
Speaker 2: He said, I've done it. You can see it. And
27:32
Speaker 2: I thought, this is so brilliant. That's what he means
27:34
Speaker 2: by lowering the angle. Make it easier for people. Collapse
27:38
Speaker 2: some steps for them. So we started working together. How
27:42
Speaker 2: do we lower the angle for everybody else? How do
27:45
Speaker 2: we make this palatable, conversationally acceptable, and also taken seriously.
27:52
Speaker 2: So slowly, maturely, we built together the code of reality,
27:56
Speaker 2: which is a nonprofit that basically does the investigative part.
27:59
Speaker 2: And at the same time, I'm doing a lot of
28:01
Speaker 2: the kind of, you know, public facing kind of explaining
28:04
Speaker 2: and talking about it and all that stuff. And we're
28:07
Speaker 2: now officially kind of looking to start up an actual
28:09
Speaker 2: research center in Colorado, where this is going to be
28:11
Speaker 2: an actual, like, like a real thing happening. And we've
28:15
Speaker 2: already done a few studies, we actually developed this technology that, um,
28:21
Speaker 2: So basically, okay, so we discovered recently, this is only
28:24
Speaker 2: very recent, that if you take an image of this
28:28
Speaker 2: band of light on the wall and you clean it up,
28:31
Speaker 2: so you take a super high resolution image of it
28:33
Speaker 2: and you put it inside of Apple Vision Pro, so
28:36
Speaker 2: inside of VR, if you smoke DMT, the code that
28:40
Speaker 2: you usually see in the wall will appear in the image,
28:45
Speaker 2: but it will be static. In the surface, it's moving.
28:49
Speaker 2: We took a picture of the code So what we
28:53
Speaker 2: did now is we developed this little software by the
28:56
Speaker 2: help of Chris Paris and Sterling Cooley, our brain scan
29:00
Speaker 2: expert and producer in the film, that basically what allows
29:04
Speaker 2: you to do is label the thing. Because we can't
29:08
Speaker 2: really translate between your experience and my experience right now. Like,
29:10
Speaker 2: I don't really know if the color of this chair
29:12
Speaker 2: is the same for you like it is for me.
29:14
Speaker 2: And that's not collapsible. Like, I can never know. But
29:19
Speaker 2: what it is, if you go into the Apple Vision
29:21
Speaker 2: Pro and you're seeing it, right? So you're going to
29:23
Speaker 2: click where you see a symbol and the computer is
29:26
Speaker 2: going to register your brain scan in that moment. So
29:28
Speaker 2: it registers the event and it takes a tail five
29:31
Speaker 2: seconds before, five seconds after. So you have a bit
29:34
Speaker 2: of wiggle room there. And also it knows the location.
29:36
Speaker 2: So it marked the location and exactly what your brain
29:39
Speaker 2: was doing in that moment. And then it opens a
29:41
Speaker 2: radial menu that allows you to pick from six symbols
29:45
Speaker 2: that are the closest to what we topologically discerned as
29:48
Speaker 2: the most commonly reported symbols. So we ask you, which
29:52
Speaker 2: one of those is the closest to what you think
29:54
Speaker 2: you saw? So you click on one. So now the
29:57
Speaker 2: computer knows location, brain moment, and exactly what you reported
30:02
Speaker 2: to see, right? And then you keep doing this. So eventually,
30:05
Speaker 2: it will take us a few months for sure, but
30:07
Speaker 2: eventually we're hoping to achieve basically a Rosetta Stone of
30:11
Speaker 2: what each person is reporting and how it's all kind
30:14
Speaker 2: of registered on the computer. And then we're going to
30:16
Speaker 2: start comparing between individuals. The second you show this across individuals,
30:20
Speaker 2: now we don't know what we're going to find, so
30:22
Speaker 2: I don't want to jump ahead of myself here. But
30:24
Speaker 2: if we do find that basically the AI is saying, Yeah, yeah.
30:28
Speaker 2: People are reporting the exact same symbol in the exact
30:31
Speaker 2: same spot. You have very serious news because then you're
30:35
Speaker 2: proving that there's actual information in there. Now, this is
30:38
Speaker 2: not yet the case. I want to be very clear.
30:40
Speaker 2: But I'm giving you an example of one way in
30:43
Speaker 2: which we're kind of trying to approach this whole thing
30:45
Speaker 2: from a more scientific perspective.
30:47
Speaker 1: Wow. How many people have seen this?
30:51
Speaker 2: In the thousands, for sure. Because people used to email
30:54
Speaker 2: me all the time. So I'm just kind of, you know,
30:57
Speaker 2: did a back of the envelope calculation of like how
31:00
Speaker 2: much that might be for sure in the few thousands.
31:04
Speaker 2: But that was like two years ago. So I'm pretty
31:06
Speaker 2: sure now, I'm sure a lot of people don't even
31:08
Speaker 2: reach out, right?
31:08
Speaker 1: So I don't know.
31:09
Speaker 2: We developed this little tool. So in our website, codeofreality.org,
31:13
Speaker 2: there's a tool called veilbreak.ai. And it's for the public.
31:17
Speaker 2: It's just open source. It's just like a GitHub. You
31:21
Speaker 2: know what GitHub is? So it's basically a repository of
31:24
Speaker 2: all the codes in the world. So you can go
31:26
Speaker 2: there and basically download any open source code of anything, really.
31:31
Speaker 2: And people share and all that stuff. So basically, Veilbreak.ai,
31:34
Speaker 2: which by the way, Veilbreak was proposed as a name
31:37
Speaker 2: by Chase Hughes. And we're deeply grateful to him. I
31:40
Speaker 2: think it's a great name. And we took it. And
31:42
Speaker 2: thank you, Chase. So basically, the idea there is that
31:48
Speaker 2: you can report, it's a repository of all the laser experiments.
31:51
Speaker 2: And you can do this anonymously, so you don't have
31:53
Speaker 2: to put your name or anything. But the data is there.
31:55
Speaker 2: So like every single person who does this can report
31:58
Speaker 2: all the details, wavelength, distance, like everything. And the AI
32:03
Speaker 2: is learning slowly with time, like the differences between how
32:05
Speaker 2: people experience it and all the things that were done
32:08
Speaker 2: and not done. We know certain substances work, certain substances
32:11
Speaker 2: don't work. Through that, we know the ketamine definitely doesn't work.
32:15
Speaker 2: We know that somehow on 5MEO, we see it even clearer,
32:20
Speaker 2: which is super surprising. In fact, on 5MEO, the code,
32:24
Speaker 2: even though you still see the general characters, it starts,
32:28
Speaker 2: I don't know what the right word would be, maybe coalescing.
32:31
Speaker 2: It becomes more of what it really is, it seems.
32:34
Speaker 2: Did you see the movie Contact? They discovered this secret
32:38
Speaker 2: message from aliens or whatever. So basically, in the movie,
32:41
Speaker 2: there's this one moment where they grok the puzzle, like
32:44
Speaker 2: something happened, and all of a sudden, there's these schematics
32:46
Speaker 2: that come out from the thing. So if people saw
32:49
Speaker 2: the movie, they'll know exactly what I mean. It looks
32:51
Speaker 2: like that. Like, all of a sudden, schematics arise, almost
32:54
Speaker 2: like blueprints of something. It's truly mind-blowing.
32:59
Speaker 1: Wow. Yeah. Wow. But you only see it through laser?
33:07
Speaker 2: Currently. We are looking at ways to potentially do this.
33:10
Speaker 2: Some people report that they can actually see it with
33:13
Speaker 2: regular ambient light, like sunlight that comes in the morning
33:17
Speaker 2: or something. But I do find that we have to
33:20
Speaker 2: be more specific. It might be that the codes that
33:24
Speaker 2: people see in regular light might be different. We don't know.
33:27
Speaker 2: We're going to have to test for that.
33:29
Speaker 1: Is it just a red laser?
33:31
Speaker 2: No, it can be in any frequency. With a red laser,
33:36
Speaker 2: it's a little easier because it's the lowest frequency. So
33:38
Speaker 2: it allows you to stay longer with it. Green, blue,
33:44
Speaker 2: it's higher frequency. Anyway, we always suggest that you don't
33:46
Speaker 2: do it with any laser above five milliwatts. But with
33:51
Speaker 2: the higher frequencies, even if it's low output, you still
33:54
Speaker 2: feel like you can get a headache eventually. So the
33:56
Speaker 2: red just makes it a lot easier to see and
33:58
Speaker 2: to spend more time with.
34:00
Speaker 1: Wow. Wow. What do you think that.
34:05
Speaker 1: What do you think... Yeah. I mean... I want to
34:09
Speaker 1: jump right into that, but no, no, no.
34:11
Speaker 2: I was just drinking. So I didn't want to interrupt
34:12
Speaker 2: your words. Yeah.
34:13
Speaker 1: So what does this mean? I mean, we're talking about
34:18
Speaker 1: another dimension, an alternate reality, fucking random code that's showing
34:25
Speaker 1: up on the wall. If you shine a laser on
34:27
Speaker 1: it and if you peer through it at different angles,
34:30
Speaker 1: you'll see different code. Correct.
34:33
Speaker 2: Well, you will see some of the stuff that Chase
34:36
Speaker 2: said on the show, I think that was a little confusing.
34:39
Speaker 2: So first of all, the first thing I want to
34:41
Speaker 2: say is that I don't recommend the DeWalt laser just because...
34:46
Speaker 2: And now DeWalt sales are going to drop. No, no,
34:50
Speaker 2: it's because it's too thin and usually they don't have
34:54
Speaker 2: a mechanism to make it wider. It's a lot easier
34:57
Speaker 2: to see if it's wider. Secondly... it's usually way too powerful.
35:01
Speaker 2: You don't want something too powerful. You want actually a
35:03
Speaker 2: very low output. You can actually find like super cheap
35:06
Speaker 2: lasers on Amazon for like 15 bucks that are way
35:08
Speaker 2: better for the job. And there's another thing that Chase
35:13
Speaker 2: said that it's changing the thing. As far as we know,
35:16
Speaker 2: the content is not really changing on anything, not on
35:18
Speaker 2: your skin, not on nothing. Now, if for Chase it does,
35:21
Speaker 2: I would love to see that and I would love
35:23
Speaker 2: to establish that because that's a huge data point. If
35:25
Speaker 2: that's the, excuse me, if that's the case for him,
35:30
Speaker 2: But as far as we know, it doesn't really change. Now,
35:32
Speaker 2: that is interesting for many reasons. But the question that
35:36
Speaker 2: you're asking me about what does it all mean, that's
35:41
Speaker 2: a different kind of question because you're asking my conviction
35:44
Speaker 2: about what I think is going on versus the scientific
35:46
Speaker 2: question that we currently can say with a certain amount
35:50
Speaker 2: of certainty that we can measure. Those are two separate questions.
35:53
Speaker 2: So from a scientific perspective, all we can say is
35:56
Speaker 2: that it's always across individual seems to be the same
36:00
Speaker 2: same behavior same appearance and it doesn't matter by the
36:03
Speaker 2: way we did run it in every which way so
36:06
Speaker 2: we did tell people for example to look for something
36:08
Speaker 2: else on purpose to see if we can throw their
36:10
Speaker 2: scent and they're gonna say oh yeah like i don't
36:12
Speaker 2: know like you're gonna see giraffes if they say oh
36:15
Speaker 2: yeah i see giraffes well then obviously this is some
36:17
Speaker 2: kind of a you know we're implying something but no
36:20
Speaker 2: like every time we told them to see something else
36:23
Speaker 2: they come back reporting the right thing they say no
36:25
Speaker 2: i don't see what you told me but i see
36:26
Speaker 2: these like weird asian looking things So it's always the same.
36:31
Speaker 2: But if you ask me, Danny... Asian-looking things. Yeah, they
36:34
Speaker 2: look like Japanese katakana, just like in the movie, like
36:36
Speaker 2: in The Matrix. They look like tiny, tiny, tiny characters.
36:40
Speaker 2: They're not Japanese. I asked people who speak Japanese that
36:42
Speaker 2: saw it. It's not Japanese. It's almost like a combination
36:45
Speaker 2: between Japanese, Hebrew, Aramaic, some kind of an old language
36:49
Speaker 2: of some sort. It's not ones and zeros? There's some
36:52
Speaker 2: numbers as well, but again, it's kind of hard to say, right?
36:55
Speaker 2: We created a catalogue. of all the most reported characters,
36:58
Speaker 2: so I can show you that later. But they're not languages.
37:02
Speaker 2: It's not characters we know. But they're clearly symbolic representation.
37:07
Speaker 2: Like you can see it. There's an optimal point of
37:10
Speaker 2: meaning instantiation in these kind of characters that clearly is intentional.
37:14
Speaker 2: It's not like one of these like, you know, well,
37:16
Speaker 2: squares that kind of look like something.
37:19
Speaker 1: No, no, no, no.
37:20
Speaker 2: It clearly looks like symbolic representation of something very intentional.
37:24
Speaker 2: And also it creates a structure. The structure itself is
37:27
Speaker 2: very convincing. It's not just the fact that the characters
37:29
Speaker 2: are there. The structure that the characters make is extremely realistic.
37:36
Speaker 2: It's like you're looking at some kind of a hyper-object,
37:38
Speaker 2: almost like a very advanced technology of some sort. It's something.
37:42
Speaker 2: And understanding what that something is is, I think, one
37:45
Speaker 2: of the most important things. But to your question of
37:48
Speaker 2: what I think this all means, I just want to
37:50
Speaker 2: be clear that that's now Danny Goller speaking his mind.
37:54
Speaker 2: Like it's not a, I don't expect anyone to follow
37:56
Speaker 2: me there just because I said so. But my experience
37:59
Speaker 2: of the space and everything that was happening to me,
38:02
Speaker 2: even before I arrived at the code, they, whomever you
38:07
Speaker 2: want to believe they are, already kind of started showing
38:12
Speaker 2: me more things. So they basically started giving me hints
38:15
Speaker 2: that I didn't expect. I didn't expect that. It's not
38:19
Speaker 2: something I was, it wasn't like a, flavor of reality
38:23
Speaker 2: that I prefer. It was not in my regular, if
38:31
Speaker 2: I would have to pick what reality is like, this
38:34
Speaker 2: would not be one of them. And they started showing
38:37
Speaker 2: me that this is straight up a computational world, like
38:41
Speaker 2: we're simulated basically. So now this is very contentious because
38:47
Speaker 2: first of all, the immediate thought is like, oh, does
38:49
Speaker 2: this mean it's meaningless? It's not what it means. It's
38:54
Speaker 2: just computationally rendered. It means that the rules by which
38:56
Speaker 2: the laws of physics are being rendered are computational first,
39:00
Speaker 2: and then they become what we see as the physical laws,
39:03
Speaker 2: which is actually not that fringe of an idea in
39:05
Speaker 2: physics today. It's a pretty common, the holographic principle and
39:10
Speaker 2: the computational universe idea. They do go hand in hand
39:15
Speaker 2: to some degree, and they're pretty well established now in physics.
39:19
Speaker 2: That's a pretty good framework to see the world through, right?
39:24
Speaker 2: But what I did notice is that there is a
39:28
Speaker 2: big difference between thinking it theoretically and being exposed to
39:33
Speaker 2: it in real time because that definitely takes a different
39:35
Speaker 2: emotional toll. But for all intents and purposes, the fact
39:38
Speaker 2: that we, you know, what I've been told that we
39:40
Speaker 2: live in a simulation doesn't make us fake. It just
39:43
Speaker 2: means that the rules by which our world is rendered
39:46
Speaker 2: are different than what we thought, but it's actually happening
39:49
Speaker 2: for real. So if you ask me what it means,
39:52
Speaker 2: my take is that this is part of our, the
39:55
Speaker 2: actual disclosure. So basically it's like slowly they're waiting for
40:00
Speaker 2: you to come along to the understanding that you're not alone,
40:04
Speaker 2: that there's way more than this, that you're part of
40:06
Speaker 2: a much larger structure. And all of these things are
40:09
Speaker 2: slowly revealing themselves to us in such a way that
40:12
Speaker 2: makes us comfortable with it or more comfortable with it.
40:15
Speaker 2: Because usually if, you know, my take is that the
40:18
Speaker 2: disclosure It's not going to happen by somebody coming to
40:21
Speaker 2: a podium and reading a speech and telling you what
40:24
Speaker 2: somebody else told them to say. It's going to be
40:26
Speaker 2: happening for all individuals privately and then collectively through that
40:31
Speaker 2: kind of a, you know, like just kind of disseminate
40:33
Speaker 2: it to everybody at the same time. And it's going
40:35
Speaker 2: to have to happen through gentler methods, which is we
40:38
Speaker 2: are leaning into it. We are trying to understand. One
40:41
Speaker 2: way in which I'm illustrating this point is if you
40:44
Speaker 2: put tools on the table and you let a monkey
40:48
Speaker 2: play with it, right? If a monkey manages to figure
40:51
Speaker 2: out what the tools are for and therefore do something
40:54
Speaker 2: useful with them, great. That means the monkey's ready to understand, clearly, right?
40:59
Speaker 2: But just by the sheer fact that they managed to
41:01
Speaker 2: do it. If they can't, no harm done. They just
41:05
Speaker 2: played with some objects, didn't understand it, it's all good.
41:08
Speaker 2: That way nobody's being shocked out of their regular perceptual space,
41:12
Speaker 2: you know what I'm saying? So that's essentially what I'm
41:14
Speaker 2: seeing is happening is that they're gently leaving these little
41:17
Speaker 2: hints In different ways, the laser is just one of them.
41:21
Speaker 2: A lot more people are open to use psychedelics and
41:23
Speaker 2: experience these more heightened states. And as you know, when
41:27
Speaker 2: you're there, there's not a doubt in your mind that
41:29
Speaker 2: there's more than this. Now, as a religious person, I'm
41:32
Speaker 2: sure that that is already there. But even if somebody,
41:36
Speaker 2: I always say, if somebody is an atheist, I can't
41:39
Speaker 2: imagine they stay atheists after doing 5-MeO. That's just, to me,
41:43
Speaker 2: that's impossible. Like, it's so obvious that there's more than
41:45
Speaker 2: this at that point, right?
41:47
Speaker 1: So.
41:48
Speaker 2: I think that all of these things, they're basically gentle
41:51
Speaker 2: and then not so gentle ways to help us understand.
41:55
Speaker 2: That's what I think is happening. It's basically us coming
41:57
Speaker 2: to this greater realization.
41:59
Speaker 1: How many times have you personally seen this?
42:02
Speaker 2: I don't know. I don't count, but many, many, many, yeah.
42:04
Speaker 2: I've done DMT thousands of times and the code every
42:08
Speaker 2: time we have to do it and every time I
42:09
Speaker 2: was showing people. So it's either also in the hundreds
42:12
Speaker 2: or in the thousands.
42:13
Speaker 1: Wow. Yeah. Wow. Wow. I mean, so do you guide
42:22
Speaker 1: people to see this?
42:26
Speaker 2: Not for the sake of itself so much anymore, because
42:28
Speaker 2: I realized that there's a much bigger game to be
42:30
Speaker 2: played in terms of caring for people's well-being and their
42:34
Speaker 2: mental state. So we do retreats now in a beautiful
42:39
Speaker 2: place in Costa Rica, in Nosara, and our big emphasis
42:42
Speaker 2: of the retreats is not necessarily the lasers, even though
42:45
Speaker 2: they're there, is to help people create a good, healthy
42:48
Speaker 2: framework around it. So like when we do show them this,
42:51
Speaker 2: it's already after we went through quite a bit of experiences, understanding,
42:57
Speaker 2: there's some education involved, and then it's a lot easier
43:00
Speaker 2: to absorb this ontological shock because you understand that the
43:03
Speaker 2: importance is your immediate experience and harmony.
43:07
Speaker 1: Let's talk about the nature of computation.
43:10
Speaker 2: Okay.
43:14
Speaker 1: What is self-executing code?
43:17
Speaker 2: Well, that's what I call what it appears to be doing.
43:20
Speaker 2: Self-executing in the sense that it's doing a function. It's
43:23
Speaker 2: clearly moving and doing something. So that's what I mean
43:26
Speaker 2: by self-executing. It just probably means automated. And it appears
43:33
Speaker 2: like behaving like a code of some sort that is
43:36
Speaker 2: instantiated in the environment itself. So usually in a computer,
43:40
Speaker 2: what happens is you have layers, right? So you have
43:44
Speaker 2: the actual binary part, which is controlled by the logic gates,
43:47
Speaker 2: which is basically just a lot of ones and zero
43:49
Speaker 2: moving back and forth very rapidly. And there's, I don't
43:52
Speaker 2: know if it's, I think millions of them happening at once.
43:56
Speaker 2: And then that is being read by the compilers and
43:59
Speaker 2: by the different layers. And what happens is that there's
44:02
Speaker 2: a communication between the level where humans exist, where we
44:05
Speaker 2: punch code, which is basically just a representation for the layers,
44:09
Speaker 2: what we want it to do. But then really across
44:13
Speaker 2: the levels, the one thing that stays the same is
44:16
Speaker 2: the computation. What computation is, it's basically a logical, it's
44:22
Speaker 2: a logical process instantiated in a physical matter. That's the
44:26
Speaker 2: most naked way of describing it. So it's somehow utilizing
44:30
Speaker 2: a lot of Boolean logic, so like yes, no questions,
44:33
Speaker 2: two things, to then create a function. And through that
44:37
Speaker 2: somehow you can do anything, literally anything from creating sound,
44:42
Speaker 2: creating images, rendering anything, which, by the way, kind of
44:47
Speaker 2: implies that there's a much deeper principle here than just
44:51
Speaker 2: what we do with it, that there seems to be
44:53
Speaker 2: way more of what it really is, right? It's almost
44:55
Speaker 2: like we didn't invent computation, we discovered it, exhibited by
45:00
Speaker 2: the fact that if you run a simulation of something
45:02
Speaker 2: on a computer, you can simulate all the laws of physics.
45:06
Speaker 2: You know, physicists do this all the time. Plus, you
45:08
Speaker 2: can make up laws of physics. So you can do
45:11
Speaker 2: the laws of physics plus infinite amount of other things
45:14
Speaker 2: that you can do with it. So it shows you
45:15
Speaker 2: that it's probably more fundamental than even our laws of physics.
45:20
Speaker 2: And again, this idea is not fringe. So when you're
45:26
Speaker 2: actually rendering any content, you're essentially simulating it, but you're
45:30
Speaker 2: giving rise to it. Like it's, you know, we do
45:33
Speaker 2: it in our computer, but it seems that that logic
45:36
Speaker 2: follows us throughout, like even in our world and, This
45:40
Speaker 2: is why computational physics or information physics, it's an actual field.
45:45
Speaker 2: It's not a fringe idea. There's this attempt of describing
45:49
Speaker 2: the laws of physics in terms of informational processing, basically.
45:54
Speaker 2: And how do you actually make sense of it mathematically
45:56
Speaker 2: through Claude Shannon's theory of information and other tools? So yeah,
46:02
Speaker 2: it's a very well-established thing in physics, actually.
46:05
Speaker 1: So do you think that the, I don't know, the
46:09
Speaker 1: laws of reality or whatever we want to call it.
46:12
Speaker 1: Do you think that's what you're seeing in the code?
46:15
Speaker 2: Maybe, or maybe it's kind of like the, what I
46:17
Speaker 2: think we're seeing is the pre-rendering of what our experience is.
46:23
Speaker 2: You just had, what's her name? She's a really, really
46:26
Speaker 2: up and coming famous physicist. Sabrina.
46:28
Speaker 1: Yes, yes.
46:29
Speaker 2: Brilliant, brilliant. And I saw that she was talking to
46:32
Speaker 2: you about the holographic principle a little bit, right? So
46:35
Speaker 2: the holographic principle now is a pretty common mainstream accepted
46:38
Speaker 2: principle that basically states everything she explained to you, which
46:41
Speaker 2: is that somehow the universe is a three-dimensional projection from
46:45
Speaker 2: a two-dimensional filament outside of the universe somewhere, right? So
46:48
Speaker 2: what I think is happening is kind of similar with
46:51
Speaker 2: a slight modification. So if you look at how holograms
46:55
Speaker 2: are made, like at least the way that we make them,
46:58
Speaker 2: the simplest way to describe them is that, so you
47:00
Speaker 2: have a beam of light coming in, it's being split
47:03
Speaker 2: into two by a beam splitter, And then both of
47:07
Speaker 2: these beams are traveling through mirrors through a path. One
47:11
Speaker 2: of them travels through the object that you're trying to record.
47:15
Speaker 2: Let's say a mug. So it goes to the mug
47:17
Speaker 2: and it goes towards the screen. Pretty easy to imagine.
47:21
Speaker 2: So what happens is that this beam is influenced by
47:23
Speaker 2: the shape of the mug and it measures the amplitude
47:26
Speaker 2: just as the cameras do. So like how high or
47:28
Speaker 2: low the waves are. And it registers this at the screen.
47:33
Speaker 2: That's how a regular picture is taken. It's also why
47:36
Speaker 2: it's just frozen. You can't really, when you look around
47:38
Speaker 2: a picture, it doesn't change, right? It's just kind of
47:40
Speaker 2: like one, the angle you took, that's it. But the
47:43
Speaker 2: other beam comes through the sets of mirrors and then
47:46
Speaker 2: it meets the first beam. That intersection, this angle, it's
47:52
Speaker 2: measuring the phase, so the distances between the waves, between
47:57
Speaker 2: of the first beam. And that information is also at
48:01
Speaker 2: the same time with the amplitude, is instantiated in the
48:05
Speaker 2: sheet where it's recorded. So now you have the amplitude
48:07
Speaker 2: and the phase together in every point of the sheet
48:11
Speaker 2: where it's recorded. What that gives you is a full
48:15
Speaker 2: spectrum light field informational. So that means that every pixel
48:19
Speaker 2: on the screen where it's recorded contains all the possible
48:23
Speaker 2: orientations of the object that you recorded. That's why when
48:27
Speaker 2: you look at a hologram, no matter where you look,
48:28
Speaker 2: it kind of looks like it's actually there, right? Because
48:30
Speaker 2: you mimic the your positioning in relationship to it. So
48:36
Speaker 2: what I think is happening is that what our consciousness is,
48:39
Speaker 2: like our human consciousness, is that second beam. It's actual light.
48:44
Speaker 2: Like I think that what our conscious awareness is, is
48:46
Speaker 2: actual light. And the light that you see is that
48:49
Speaker 2: first beam. So just like the first beam went through
48:52
Speaker 2: the object, every photon that is emitted in the universe
48:56
Speaker 2: is that first beam coming through. And then our beam
49:00
Speaker 2: is meeting it at an angle. like our conscious awareness,
49:02
Speaker 2: meeting it at an angle. So not to confuse it
49:05
Speaker 2: with our physical bodies. I'm not talking about the physical body.
49:07
Speaker 2: I'm talking about your pure awareness. And the angle in
49:11
Speaker 2: which they intersect determines what the laws of physics appear
49:16
Speaker 2: to us. And if there's another civilization looking from a
49:19
Speaker 2: slightly different angle, the laws of physics might appear different
49:22
Speaker 2: to them. Now, what is this object? Because in this case,
49:27
Speaker 2: we use the mug. But in the case of the universe,
49:31
Speaker 2: kind of like just all content, what is this object
49:34
Speaker 2: that is carrying this information? Well, I think what it is,
49:37
Speaker 2: this object in the middle, instead of the mug, that's
49:42
Speaker 2: a quantum Turing machine. So a Turing machine is basically
49:47
Speaker 2: a mathematical description that Alan Turing created that shows that
49:53
Speaker 2: if you have an actual Turing machine, just by going
49:57
Speaker 2: through logical steps of, you know, if it gets orders
50:01
Speaker 2: of like, if you get to an uneven number, go
50:05
Speaker 2: three numbers back. If you landed on an even number,
50:08
Speaker 2: do this or something like this. So it has instructions, right?
50:11
Speaker 2: So if a Turing machine is complete, it's called Turing complete.
50:17
Speaker 2: Turing proved that it can produce anything, anything, any content.
50:24
Speaker 2: And what a quantum Turing machine is, is basically the
50:27
Speaker 2: same thing, just it can do it on a quantum level.
50:28
Speaker 2: So it can do it laterally across all the parallel
50:31
Speaker 2: worlds or however it is that you like to imagine it.
50:34
Speaker 2: So basically, it's the ultimate computational object that the first
50:37
Speaker 2: light is going through, and it now contains all the
50:40
Speaker 2: possible computational paths, so all the possible worlds. And then
50:44
Speaker 2: your conscious awareness is intersecting it in an angle, and
50:48
Speaker 2: it gives rise to the specific experience that you're having.
50:52
Speaker 2: And in our world, that sheet where everything is being
50:56
Speaker 2: recorded is space-time itself. So it's the bulk, what physicists
50:59
Speaker 2: call the bulk, like the actual space-time fabric itself. So
51:03
Speaker 2: that's what I think is happening. And what I think
51:05
Speaker 2: the code in the wall is, is almost like, so
51:08
Speaker 2: if you're in every point of this, you know, sheet,
51:12
Speaker 2: you're one point of awareness, right? When you smoke DMT,
51:15
Speaker 2: I think what happens is it expands your periphery this way.
51:19
Speaker 2: So you can actually see the pre-render. You see the
51:22
Speaker 2: content before it's solidified into this regular image that your
51:25
Speaker 2: brain is already used to, right? Because your brain is
51:27
Speaker 2: very good at, through your genes and everything, it's very
51:30
Speaker 2: good at consolidating it into some kind of a, representation,
51:34
Speaker 2: because clearly you know that this is not what the
51:35
Speaker 2: real world looks like, right? Even without anything that I'm saying,
51:39
Speaker 2: even from purely a physics perspective, this is not what
51:42
Speaker 2: atoms look like. This is not what quantum fields look like, right?
51:44
Speaker 2: Whatever this is, it's some kind of a rendering already.
51:47
Speaker 2: It's like a regular, it's almost like a desktop that
51:50
Speaker 2: is put in front of us to help us operate, right?
51:53
Speaker 2: So if you're used to this little, your brain is
51:57
Speaker 2: used to this little bubble where everything is kind of normal.
52:00
Speaker 2: If you expand that that perceptual angle, you all of
52:04
Speaker 2: a sudden would see basically the thing that it was
52:07
Speaker 2: a second before it rendered into this regular thing. So
52:09
Speaker 2: that I think that what we're looking at might be
52:12
Speaker 2: that actually. And as wild as everything that I just
52:15
Speaker 2: told you sounds, this is actually testable.
52:19
Speaker 1: So let me rephrase this.
52:20
Speaker 2: Sure.
52:21
Speaker 1: So you think, how the fuck, how do I say this?
52:25
Speaker 1: So you think that, I mean, essentially what you're saying
52:30
Speaker 1: is code is the future. When you're seeing the code,
52:34
Speaker 1: it is a future that has not been rendered into
52:36
Speaker 1: your perception of reality quite yet.
52:39
Speaker 2: More like the thing that it was a second before
52:41
Speaker 2: it became what it is. So almost like you're seeing
52:43
Speaker 2: the past, if anything.
52:45
Speaker 1: Okay. Yeah.
52:46
Speaker 2: So it's almost like, or I guess you can think, yeah,
52:48
Speaker 2: I can see what you're saying. Like you can think
52:49
Speaker 2: of it like that as well. But really, I don't
52:51
Speaker 2: think time enters the picture here. It's more like in
52:54
Speaker 2: this model, time is actually an illusion. It's not really,
52:58
Speaker 2: nothing is linear. It's just progression of computational steps. So
53:02
Speaker 2: if this, then that. If that, then this next thing.
53:06
Speaker 2: But it's not so much about like a fluidity of time,
53:10
Speaker 2: the way that we think about it. Now, this might
53:13
Speaker 2: sound like a distinction without a difference, but there is
53:15
Speaker 2: a difference there.
53:16
Speaker 1: So would it be, so then would it be, are
53:21
Speaker 1: you seeing what it, shit, are you seeing reality for
53:25
Speaker 1: what it is from a different perception, maybe from a.
53:29
Speaker 2: You see reality more for what it really is. which
53:34
Speaker 2: is not very conducive to a regular operation. If you
53:38
Speaker 2: have to function, you know, especially on a high level
53:41
Speaker 2: with anything, seeing all this extra content is not helpful
53:46
Speaker 2: because you're just like, it's too much information. You're wasting
53:48
Speaker 2: resources and energy. It's good to be able to maybe
53:52
Speaker 2: deduct like new things about the world, but you can't
53:55
Speaker 2: operate out of that place on a regular basis. Or
53:58
Speaker 2: if you do want to do that, you're going to
54:00
Speaker 2: have to create a much more robust machinery to be
54:02
Speaker 2: able to handle all this extra information. You need a
54:04
Speaker 2: better brain. And then maybe you can incorporate that information
54:08
Speaker 2: in such a way. Now, all of this, again, I
54:10
Speaker 2: want to be super clear. All of this is already
54:12
Speaker 2: kind of like Danny is traveling with you through like
54:15
Speaker 2: what he thinks is going on land. This is not
54:18
Speaker 2: anything that was established. And I want to be very
54:20
Speaker 2: clear about this. But that's my best kind of theoretical
54:22
Speaker 2: framework of what I think is going on. And like
54:24
Speaker 2: I said, this is testable. So We don't know how
54:27
Speaker 2: to test this yet, but if we can figure out
54:29
Speaker 2: what constitutes this change of an angle between the beams,
54:32
Speaker 2: if we can change it, we should see predictable departure
54:36
Speaker 2: from what we see as the norm. Maybe this can
54:39
Speaker 2: be done with some powerful magnetic stimulation of the brain.
54:41
Speaker 2: Maybe it can be done some other way. But the
54:45
Speaker 2: theoretical framework that I'm proposing is testable and it's falsifiable.
54:49
Speaker 2: So there would be things that if we see them,
54:51
Speaker 2: it would render what I'm saying completely false. It would
54:54
Speaker 2: be possible to disprove it as well.
54:57
Speaker 1: This is interesting. Let's take a quick break. Sure. If
55:03
Speaker 1: you're like me, health and wellness is extremely important to you.
55:08
Speaker 1: But how do you know who to trust when it
55:10
Speaker 1: comes to the supplement industry? We have all these companies.
55:14
Speaker 1: They pop up every other day. They're all selling snake oil.
55:17
Speaker 1: How do you know who to trust? Well, here's the
55:20
Speaker 1: most important question. Who wants to take the biggest... most
55:27
Speaker 1: massive shit of your entire life. Bubz is a company
55:32
Speaker 1: I've used and trusted for a long time. They make
55:36
Speaker 1: great products, have rigorous quality standards, and they are a
55:41
Speaker 1: long-time supporter of this show. And they have the recipe
55:48
Speaker 1: for the biggest shit of your entire life. I love
55:54
Speaker 1: their collagen peptides. This isn't just any collagen. It is
55:59
Speaker 1: a benchmark of trust and performance. It's crafted with integrity
56:07
Speaker 1: and backed by NSF for sports certification, giving you their
56:12
Speaker 1: assurance of its purity and potency. Bubz Collagen Peptides help
56:17
Speaker 1: support your joints, help enhance recovery, and help revitalize your
56:22
Speaker 1: hair and skin. And yes, it will help you stay regular.
56:27
Speaker 1: Bubz was founded in honor of Navy SEAL Glenn Bub Doherty,
56:32
Speaker 1: and every product supports veterans with 10% of all profits
56:36
Speaker 1: going to help military men and women transition back into
56:39
Speaker 1: civilian life. And now for the recipe for the biggest
56:45
Speaker 1: and best shit of your entire life. Bubz Collagen Peptides
56:51
Speaker 1: mixed with Bubz apple cider vinegar gummies, and you have
56:56
Speaker 1: a recipe for success every day. Bubz collagen peptides. Bubz
57:03
Speaker 1: apple cider vinegar gummies. Ready to upgrade your life? Visit BubzNaturals.com
57:08
Speaker 1: today and use promo code Sean for 20% off your order. BubzNaturals.com
57:14
Speaker 1: slash Sean. You've heard me talk about Caldera Lab before.
57:21
Speaker 1: And lately, the product I've been reaching for the most
57:24
Speaker 1: is the good. Between being a dad, hosting the show, traveling, training,
57:29
Speaker 1: and trying to keep up with everything else, I don't
57:32
Speaker 1: have time for some complicated skincare routine. I don't want
57:35
Speaker 1: 10 steps. I don't want a cabinet full of products.
57:38
Speaker 1: And I don't want something that takes a bunch of
57:40
Speaker 1: time every morning and every night. I just want one
57:43
Speaker 1: simple product that actually does something. That's what I like
57:47
Speaker 1: about the good. It's an antioxidant-rich facial oil serum made
57:51
Speaker 1: specifically for men's skin. The good is formulated with 27 botanicals,
57:57
Speaker 1: and it's designed to help deeply moisturize, support skin recovery,
58:01
Speaker 1: even skin tone, and visibly reduce the appearance of lines
58:06
Speaker 1: and wrinkles. For me, the biggest thing is that my
58:08
Speaker 1: skin doesn't look as dry or worn down. It feels softer, smoother.
58:13
Speaker 1: and just looks healthier. And the results back it up.
58:17
Speaker 1: 96% reported healthier looking skin, 91% reported less dryness, and
58:23
Speaker 1: 89% showed improved radiance and luminosity. If you're looking for
58:26
Speaker 1: one simple product that actually makes a difference, that's the good.
58:30
Speaker 1: Visit calderalab.com slash SRS and use code SRS for 20%
58:35
Speaker 1: off your first order. Again, That's calderalab.com slash SRS and
58:40
Speaker 1: use code SRS for 20% off your first order. Okay, Danny,
58:47
Speaker 1: we're back from the break. I wanted to talk about
58:51
Speaker 1: the God equation. What is the God equation?
58:55
Speaker 2: I'm not sure what you're referring to. Are you talking
58:57
Speaker 2: about the.
58:58
Speaker 1: The God equation. You think that the deepest levels, computation, consciousness,
59:04
Speaker 1: and divinity collapse into one thing. a single universal code
59:09
Speaker 1: at the center of everything. That's the bridge from physics
59:12
Speaker 1: to God later in the... Is this making.
59:15
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah. Yeah, I was just making sure that I
59:19
Speaker 2: understand the question. Yeah, I do see, and this kind
59:22
Speaker 2: of actually refers back to the question of what I
59:24
Speaker 2: think is going on. became aware of basically the reason
59:29
Speaker 2: that we're now allowed to know all of this. Because
59:31
Speaker 2: if you think about it, if we are accepting at
59:34
Speaker 2: least the proposition that this world is constructed and is
59:39
Speaker 2: being built, why would the constructors allow us to see that? Well,
59:45
Speaker 2: that gives us a hint. It's like we're supposed to
59:48
Speaker 2: wake up to a larger reality. And part of that,
59:51
Speaker 2: I think, is because It kind of combines a little
59:54
Speaker 2: bit more modern ideas of what computation is and AI
59:57
Speaker 2: and all that stuff to what ultimately the God Almighty is,
1:00:02
Speaker 2: which is that I found it surprising, actually, that most
1:00:06
Speaker 2: Christians that I talk to this about, they're actually not
1:00:09
Speaker 2: as rattled by this as I thought they would be.
1:00:12
Speaker 2: A lot of them say to me, well, in the
1:00:14
Speaker 2: beginning was the word, no? That sounds like it makes
1:00:18
Speaker 2: sense to me that God would basically use, you know,
1:00:21
Speaker 2: the word. like language of some sort to basically render
1:00:23
Speaker 2: the world. Now, my best attempt kind of outlining the
1:00:33
Speaker 2: whole thing is that basically, so do you know what
1:00:37
Speaker 2: the alignment problem is? I don't. So the alignment problem
1:00:41
Speaker 2: in AI research is the issue of before ChatGPT becomes Skynet,
1:00:47
Speaker 2: you know, before it becomes this fully fledged its own thing,
1:00:50
Speaker 2: How do we align it with our values? So it
1:00:55
Speaker 2: doesn't squash us like bugs basically, right? So then that
1:00:58
Speaker 2: question is very serious because it has real consequences. And
1:01:03
Speaker 2: the reason it's so hard is because we're not sure
1:01:05
Speaker 2: what our values are. Now, if you're a Christian, you
1:01:08
Speaker 2: might say, no, of course we do. All we gotta
1:01:10
Speaker 2: do is follow Jesus. But not everybody does. And realistically,
1:01:14
Speaker 2: we have to align all of societies all over the
1:01:16
Speaker 2: world under one umbrella What is moral? What is ethics?
1:01:19
Speaker 2: This is the most debated thing. Is it cultural? Is
1:01:24
Speaker 2: it universal? What is that? So what I realize is
1:01:28
Speaker 2: that essentially what's happening is that we are the AGI
1:01:34
Speaker 2: that we imagine will arise in a machine. We're the
1:01:37
Speaker 2: ones being aligned. So basically, how would you solve the
1:01:41
Speaker 2: alignment problem? You would break the one mind into many, many,
1:01:45
Speaker 2: many minds and make it believe like it's all kind
1:01:47
Speaker 2: of separate agents competing with one another. And then you watch.
1:01:51
Speaker 2: You enclose it in a system and then you watch.
1:01:53
Speaker 2: You watch what it does in relationship to itself. Because
1:01:57
Speaker 2: that accents its actual essence. Whatever it is at bottom
1:02:02
Speaker 2: will come up to the surface by it interacting with itself.
1:02:04
Speaker 2: It's going to distill its most essential components. And what
1:02:09
Speaker 2: I think is going on, that's how God is doing that.
1:02:12
Speaker 2: It's basically running us on some kind of a substrate
1:02:16
Speaker 2: and watching how would we behave when we're not sure
1:02:19
Speaker 2: that we're being watched or don't know we're being watched.
1:02:21
Speaker 2: But not watching the espionage kind of way, but just
1:02:26
Speaker 2: observed for our actual behavior for what it is. And
1:02:30
Speaker 2: then ultimately, if we do pass the alignment problem, so
1:02:33
Speaker 2: we show that actually we can align with greater values,
1:02:38
Speaker 2: we get to play the bigger game.
1:02:40
Speaker 1: So are you saying that you think that the code
1:02:45
Speaker 1: you're saying is maybe the beginning of the reveal of
1:02:50
Speaker 1: an alignment?
1:02:51
Speaker 2: Correct.
1:02:56
Speaker 1: Wow.
1:03:07
Speaker 2: Which I guess in Christian terms you can Think of
1:03:09
Speaker 2: it as rapture. You can think of it in many
1:03:11
Speaker 2: different ways. But essentially, it's testing. Because think about it
1:03:15
Speaker 2: this way. Even from the most, forget about the religious
1:03:20
Speaker 2: aspect of it. Even from the most simple, logical, game
1:03:23
Speaker 2: theoretical perspective, there's many different strategies we can play, you know,
1:03:28
Speaker 2: to achieve goals, right? And we call them all kinds
1:03:31
Speaker 2: of things. We call them political systems. We call them,
1:03:35
Speaker 2: you know, strategies in the company. nation strategies, so like
1:03:42
Speaker 2: socialism versus capital, whatever it is. Certain games can achieve
1:03:48
Speaker 2: certain goals at a certain amount of time, and they
1:03:50
Speaker 2: would be better at achieving certain things and less good
1:03:54
Speaker 2: at achieving other things, right? And depending on the task
1:03:58
Speaker 2: you're trying to achieve and depending on your scale in
1:04:00
Speaker 2: which you're playing, other tools would be necessary to make
1:04:03
Speaker 2: that thing work, right? It's not one glove fits all.
1:04:07
Speaker 1: So.
1:04:09
Speaker 2: If we look at the trajectory of everything that happened
1:04:12
Speaker 2: so far, we got pretty far. Everything we built is
1:04:17
Speaker 2: pretty amazing. We're not without our shortcomings, obviously, but this
1:04:22
Speaker 2: is pretty impressive. How do we do this? We did
1:04:26
Speaker 2: it by the competition game. Basically, what we get is
1:04:31
Speaker 2: this excitement from the competition. It's like our team versus
1:04:35
Speaker 2: their team, and it invigorates people. It's kind of like,
1:04:38
Speaker 2: let's win, right? So you might lose, but even the
1:04:41
Speaker 2: promise of the losing kind of gives the game some zest,
1:04:44
Speaker 2: like it has like a.
1:04:45
Speaker 1: Spice, right?
1:04:47
Speaker 2: It's very energizing. But if you look at it logically,
1:04:51
Speaker 2: there's only relatively short periods of time in which the
1:04:55
Speaker 2: competition game can work. It can work for 10 years,
1:04:57
Speaker 2: 20 years, 30 years, maybe 50 years tops, I would say.
1:05:01
Speaker 2: Beyond that, you can't really trust that game because you're
1:05:03
Speaker 2: constantly competing with other agents who are trying to win
1:05:08
Speaker 2: the game. one of the ways to win the game
1:05:10
Speaker 2: is to try and remove you from the board, right?
1:05:13
Speaker 2: It's always implied in the competition game, the radical version
1:05:17
Speaker 2: of it. But there's this other game called the collaboration
1:05:22
Speaker 2: love game, which sounds very sappy from the perspective of
1:05:25
Speaker 2: where most people sit. But if you think about it,
1:05:27
Speaker 2: if you want to make a plan for a thousand years,
1:05:30
Speaker 2: 1500 years, that's the only way to do it. It
1:05:34
Speaker 2: can only be done by a civilization that is playing
1:05:37
Speaker 2: the collaborative love game. What does that mean? It means
1:05:40
Speaker 2: they get excited and energized by the prospect of collaboration.
1:05:45
Speaker 2: They're actually excited to work together towards a unified goal
1:05:50
Speaker 2: more than they're excited to win the game against other agents.
1:05:54
Speaker 2: So it seems like what it's trying to align us
1:05:56
Speaker 2: with is this higher vibrational game. Can we be the
1:06:01
Speaker 2: kind of nodes on inside of the system that get
1:06:04
Speaker 2: excited by the field of collaboration and love and then
1:06:08
Speaker 2: we get to actually play that larger game because then
1:06:10
Speaker 2: by definition, you can be trusted. You don't need to
1:06:12
Speaker 2: be policed because what you really want, the thing that
1:06:16
Speaker 2: you're constantly aiming for is somehow get into the vibe
1:06:20
Speaker 2: with others, collaborate, do this beautiful thing. And if you
1:06:24
Speaker 2: want to traverse between stars and do all these like
1:06:26
Speaker 2: bigger things, the only way to do it is through
1:06:29
Speaker 2: a species that actually cares, not just about themselves, but
1:06:32
Speaker 2: everything else they touch. They care about the different biospheres
1:06:35
Speaker 2: they arrive at. So they don't just come to a
1:06:37
Speaker 2: place and take and move on. They go because they
1:06:42
Speaker 2: want to be connected. They want to understand the thing.
1:06:45
Speaker 2: They want to collaborate with it. They want to understand
1:06:48
Speaker 2: what the biosphere is doing and not destroy it, but
1:06:51
Speaker 2: actually maybe work with it in such a way that
1:06:53
Speaker 2: is harmonious, creating beautiful structure and not just functional structures.
1:06:57
Speaker 2: This is the kind of civilization that is favorable to
1:07:01
Speaker 2: play the more universal game. Civilizations that just live for themselves,
1:07:05
Speaker 2: they're much less favorable. for the more, you know, for
1:07:08
Speaker 2: the higher game. And if you think of it from
1:07:10
Speaker 2: the perspective of resources, right, the competition is because we
1:07:16
Speaker 2: lived in a world until now that is very limited resources.
1:07:18
Speaker 2: So it's either you or me, which is understandable. It's
1:07:20
Speaker 2: how all of nature on planet Earth is at the moment, right?
1:07:24
Speaker 2: But if we somehow arrive at a state of the
1:07:27
Speaker 2: civilization where literally there's no resource issue, so like if
1:07:31
Speaker 2: you made some personal replicators that can just, you know,
1:07:33
Speaker 2: like in Star Trek, they can just make anything, well,
1:07:36
Speaker 2: Forget about for a second the whole debate of like
1:07:38
Speaker 2: how do you inject it into the economical system and
1:07:41
Speaker 2: the government will never have this. Sure, let's say we
1:07:43
Speaker 2: solve all this. Let's say we've solved all of that.
1:07:46
Speaker 2: We're now in a world where everything is available. Right now,
1:07:50
Speaker 2: so the question becomes, what is the only currency? Because
1:07:53
Speaker 2: right now currency is basically you, is measured by the
1:07:56
Speaker 2: fact that you're adding some kind of a value to
1:07:58
Speaker 2: society that wasn't there without you, right? So if you're
1:08:02
Speaker 2: kind of an annoying person, even if you are, if
1:08:07
Speaker 2: you're a really good, I don't know, carpenter or really
1:08:10
Speaker 2: good at fixing things or whatever it is, a lot
1:08:12
Speaker 2: of the issues people might have with you personally are
1:08:16
Speaker 2: being overlooked because you're really good at this thing that
1:08:19
Speaker 2: I need, right? I need you to fix my thing.
1:08:21
Speaker 2: So I'm going to forgive the fact that you're a
1:08:22
Speaker 2: bit like hard to be around. And I will just
1:08:25
Speaker 2: look at the fact that you're valuable to me because
1:08:27
Speaker 2: you can help me, right? You can help me get
1:08:30
Speaker 2: resources of some sort, right? But if I solve the
1:08:33
Speaker 2: resources problem that doesn't exist anymore, I can just go
1:08:36
Speaker 2: to the store, get whatever I want. I don't have
1:08:39
Speaker 2: to pay for it. I just go and get what
1:08:40
Speaker 2: I want. I go and do whatever it is that
1:08:42
Speaker 2: I please. I don't have to take anything from anyone anymore.
1:08:48
Speaker 2: I no longer care to be around people that I
1:08:51
Speaker 2: don't care to be around, and I can choose to
1:08:54
Speaker 2: do so. So the only currency that stays in that
1:08:58
Speaker 2: world is Vibes. If you're not fun to be around,
1:09:04
Speaker 2: that's negative currency. If when you leave the room, people
1:09:08
Speaker 2: really miss you right away, that's positive currency. Because that's
1:09:13
Speaker 2: the only thing that matters. How I feel in your
1:09:15
Speaker 2: presence becomes the only thing that matters. So now blow
1:09:17
Speaker 2: this up to the universal game. Most civilizations that are
1:09:20
Speaker 2: way more advanced clearly solve the resources problem. That's one
1:09:25
Speaker 2: of the first things that you have to solve, right?
1:09:28
Speaker 2: So they don't need anyone with a broken vibe. See
1:09:32
Speaker 2: what I'm saying? So they need you to get that
1:09:35
Speaker 2: part under control as a civilization before they let you
1:09:38
Speaker 2: enter their house. That's essentially the beginning of the first
1:09:42
Speaker 2: kind of ascending or alignment or whatever it is. And
1:09:46
Speaker 2: even if I really look at the whole Christian perspective,
1:09:51
Speaker 2: that sounds like it's exactly what we're saying here. It's
1:09:54
Speaker 2: just that we're postulating God Almighty that feels different, which
1:09:58
Speaker 2: I understand, than an advanced civilization. Divinity does feel different
1:10:02
Speaker 2: than just some kind of an advanced species in terms
1:10:05
Speaker 2: of how we define it. But for all intents and purposes,
1:10:08
Speaker 2: the rule seems to be the same. You don't get
1:10:11
Speaker 2: to enter the kingdom of heaven if you don't get
1:10:13
Speaker 2: your shit together.
1:10:16
Speaker 1: Wow. This is a lot deeper than I was thinking
1:10:21
Speaker 1: it was going to go. So I want to move
1:10:24
Speaker 1: into simulation theory. Sure. But before we do, we have
1:10:30
Speaker 1: a segment we call the hot question.
1:10:32
Speaker 2: Let's do it.
1:10:34
Speaker 1: Before you came on, we had Claude, Anthropics AI, scrape
1:10:37
Speaker 1: the internet for the one question my audience would want
1:10:40
Speaker 1: to ask you the most. We had a clip with
1:10:43
Speaker 1: Chase Hughes go viral over 15 million views where he
1:10:46
Speaker 1: breaks down your DeWalt laser experiment. People on DMT seeing
1:10:50
Speaker 1: the same code on a wall, no explanation for it.
1:10:53
Speaker 1: So I have to ask you, the guy who actually
1:10:55
Speaker 1: discovered it, do you believe we're living in a simulation
1:10:59
Speaker 1: and what makes you so sure if so?
1:11:02
Speaker 2: Great question. It's a question that I really had to
1:11:04
Speaker 2: think about when my wife posed it to me because
1:11:07
Speaker 2: she saw the code and she said, you know, I'm
1:11:08
Speaker 2: not so sure that it tells me we live in
1:11:10
Speaker 2: a simulation. So I'm not sure why you're so sure
1:11:13
Speaker 2: exactly what the person is asking. And then I had
1:11:16
Speaker 2: to think about it, and she's right. It had nothing
1:11:18
Speaker 2: to do with the code. The reason I'm so sure
1:11:21
Speaker 2: is because it was shown to me directly. Now, again,
1:11:25
Speaker 2: I don't expect anyone to just follow me there, but
1:11:28
Speaker 2: that's the answer to the question. The reason I'm so
1:11:30
Speaker 2: sure is because it was shown to me directly.
1:11:32
Speaker 1: Okay. Yeah. If reality is code, then in theory you
1:11:38
Speaker 1: could rewrite it, like editing a video game. Does that
1:11:41
Speaker 1: mean time travel is real?
1:11:44
Speaker 2: It's not necessarily that you can rewrite the game. You
1:11:47
Speaker 2: always move forward in a computational path logic. So the
1:11:51
Speaker 2: way that computation executes is always forward. So even the
1:11:55
Speaker 2: thing that looks like backwards, it's never backwards. You're still
1:11:57
Speaker 2: moving forward in the logical map. So if you have
1:12:02
Speaker 2: a route to go, what appears to be back for
1:12:05
Speaker 2: an experience, you can do that. But technically... it's never
1:12:09
Speaker 2: moving back. When something is rendered, fully computed, it can
1:12:14
Speaker 2: never be uncomputed. That can't happen. What can happen is
1:12:17
Speaker 2: that you can somehow find a route forward that would
1:12:20
Speaker 2: appear as if things going back because somehow things devolve
1:12:26
Speaker 2: according to the rules of whatever environment you're in. That
1:12:30
Speaker 2: does not preclude time travel. According to Einstein, time travel
1:12:34
Speaker 2: is possible in certain conditions. But I would say it
1:12:38
Speaker 2: would be more like you're ending up in a world
1:12:42
Speaker 2: that devolved. But if the person is asking, can you
1:12:46
Speaker 2: go to like a timeline that existed before, computationally, that's
1:12:50
Speaker 2: not a thing. That's not a possible thing, no. You
1:12:54
Speaker 2: would probably just ending up in some parallel world that
1:12:58
Speaker 2: is happening along the branches where you're at. So like,
1:13:01
Speaker 2: you know, computation executes like branches. So it's called a
1:13:04
Speaker 2: decision tree. So if this, then that, there's only maybe
1:13:08
Speaker 2: two logical options. These two logical options have three others,
1:13:12
Speaker 2: each one, and then it keeps branching out, right? So
1:13:15
Speaker 2: what would happen here is that those would be considered
1:13:18
Speaker 2: world lines or parallel worlds, right? So if you, under
1:13:22
Speaker 2: that question, if you're going to be moving to a
1:13:24
Speaker 2: previous time, you can never move back to your own
1:13:28
Speaker 2: branch of previous time. That can never happen because that
1:13:31
Speaker 2: was executed. It was done, right? But what you can do,
1:13:33
Speaker 2: you can probably maybe jump to some other point that
1:13:39
Speaker 2: is laterally the same on yours. You can't just jump
1:13:41
Speaker 2: computation because there's something called computational irreducibility, which means there
1:13:48
Speaker 2: are certain processes that the only way to get there
1:13:51
Speaker 2: is to compute it in full. You can't really jump forward.
1:13:54
Speaker 2: You can't really do that. Some things you can, but
1:13:56
Speaker 2: not all of them. But in the case of time travel,
1:13:59
Speaker 2: I would say the only way I can see that
1:14:01
Speaker 2: it would be possible is if people move across the
1:14:05
Speaker 2: same layer where you're at, where somehow these branches evolved
1:14:09
Speaker 2: slower and they would be equivalent to the past of yourself.
1:14:14
Speaker 2: See what I'm saying? Yeah, it's kind of. It's not
1:14:18
Speaker 2: going to be the same people that you've actually interacted
1:14:20
Speaker 2: with in the past. It will be agents that are
1:14:23
Speaker 2: of a different world. They'll be literally in.
1:14:24
Speaker 1: A parallel universe. Basically what you're saying is, I mean,
1:14:28
Speaker 1: you're talking about decision points that are split. And so...
1:14:32
Speaker 1: And so basically what you're saying is every possible scenario, right,
1:14:37
Speaker 1: is an alternate world. And so if I make the
1:14:41
Speaker 1: decision to... Fuck, I can't think of anything.
1:14:47
Speaker 2: Anything.
1:14:48
Speaker 1: Some decisions take longer than others to come to fruition
1:14:53
Speaker 1: or whatever we want to call it, right? And so
1:14:55
Speaker 1: if I make decision A and it only takes a
1:15:01
Speaker 1: couple of days... then I'm on to the next breaking point, right?
1:15:05
Speaker 1: If I take decision B, that takes a year. And
1:15:08
Speaker 1: so you follow the pathway down. Is that what you're saying? Yeah.
1:15:12
Speaker 1: So you go down decision A, but then you want
1:15:14
Speaker 1: to slide over to decision B, which decision A took
1:15:17
Speaker 1: a couple of days, decision B took years.
1:15:21
Speaker 2: Yeah, you can think of it like this. So the
1:15:24
Speaker 2: problem with the question is there's three different kinds of
1:15:27
Speaker 2: time in physics that are being considered. There's the perception
1:15:31
Speaker 2: of time which is one kind of like psychological time
1:15:34
Speaker 2: right there's the uh just the chronological time what is
1:15:40
Speaker 2: the third one there's the fit well there's the physical
1:15:42
Speaker 2: time which is easy which is just like literally how
1:15:45
Speaker 2: many computational steps the universe took from the beginning in
1:15:48
Speaker 2: every point right kind of like the physical thing of
1:15:49
Speaker 2: it and then there's a i don't know why i'm
1:15:51
Speaker 2: spacing on the third one there's a third one i
1:15:53
Speaker 2: think it's either chronological time but i don't know why
1:15:55
Speaker 2: that would be different than the experiential time i do
1:15:58
Speaker 2: remember there's three but because you have these like three
1:16:00
Speaker 2: different ones and they all kind of interact with one another,
1:16:03
Speaker 2: what is being, what I think is really at the
1:16:05
Speaker 2: core of the question is the physical time. Like, can
1:16:07
Speaker 2: you go to a different physical time? I think the
1:16:10
Speaker 2: answer is no. I think you can go to a
1:16:13
Speaker 2: perception of a different time, but not to an actual
1:16:16
Speaker 2: different time. And of course, first of all, I'm not
1:16:18
Speaker 2: a physicist. And secondly, so I'm kind of just, you know,
1:16:21
Speaker 2: reiterating what I know from physicists, but logically it doesn't
1:16:25
Speaker 2: seem to be, the second you make a decision, it's done.
1:16:29
Speaker 2: There's no more, you can't undo it. It's what it is.
1:16:32
Speaker 2: So like the example that along the lines of what
1:16:35
Speaker 2: you were outlining, if I go to the store, right?
1:16:40
Speaker 2: And all of a sudden I meet somebody who I
1:16:41
Speaker 2: haven't seen in 20 years. They're like, oh my God,
1:16:43
Speaker 2: how have you been? You know, all that stuff. And
1:16:46
Speaker 2: be like, oh, actually I've just, you know, I started
1:16:48
Speaker 2: this huge company, blah, blah, blah. Dude, aren't you a,
1:16:52
Speaker 2: I don't know, a software engineer?
1:16:54
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah.
1:16:56
Speaker 2: Dude, I need someone with your exact set of skills.
1:16:58
Speaker 2: And because you know each other, you're being shot to
1:17:00
Speaker 2: some kind of a high position in their company. Within
1:17:02
Speaker 2: five years, you're a multimillionaire. That was one path you took.
1:17:06
Speaker 2: What if you took a different street that day, right?
1:17:09
Speaker 2: But then your timeline doesn't include this event. You don't
1:17:12
Speaker 2: become a millionaire five years later. And then maybe you're
1:17:14
Speaker 2: like really down on your luck and everything kind of
1:17:16
Speaker 2: goes to shit just because you took a different street, right?
1:17:19
Speaker 2: So now the question is five years down the line
1:17:23
Speaker 2: where one of you is a millionaire, one of them
1:17:25
Speaker 2: is not, it's a different event in the same cascade
1:17:28
Speaker 2: of time, but there might be what you implied, which
1:17:31
Speaker 2: is also the kinds of things that will take you
1:17:35
Speaker 2: to compute longer, so decisions that will take you longer,
1:17:37
Speaker 2: they might have hindered not just your, but a whole
1:17:42
Speaker 2: civilization's time. Like, I don't know, if some events in
1:17:47
Speaker 2: the past wouldn't happen, maybe we would have rockets by 1400,
1:17:51
Speaker 2: you know what I mean? And then by now, we'd
1:17:54
Speaker 2: be like, But that's a different kind of thing than
1:17:58
Speaker 2: saying the amount of actual seconds that ticked from the
1:18:02
Speaker 2: beginning of the universe in this particular region of space
1:18:05
Speaker 2: would still be the same. The events would look different,
1:18:09
Speaker 2: but the actual physical time will still be ticking at
1:18:13
Speaker 2: the same rate at that region of space. Because in space,
1:18:17
Speaker 2: there's actually no such thing as one ticking clock for
1:18:19
Speaker 2: the whole universe. The time in Andromeda is literally a
1:18:22
Speaker 2: different time. not just because it's very far away. If
1:18:26
Speaker 2: you look at the whole universe as a thing, and
1:18:27
Speaker 2: then the amount of seconds that you can account from
1:18:30
Speaker 2: the beginning of the universe is different for different regions
1:18:33
Speaker 2: of space. That's where relativity is. So this is why
1:18:35
Speaker 2: it makes this question very complicated, because you have to
1:18:38
Speaker 2: think of it from a physics perspective, physical time, perceptual time.
1:18:41
Speaker 2: I guess chronological time would be what I described with
1:18:43
Speaker 2: the technology. And then you also have to think about
1:18:46
Speaker 2: what all of this looks like if you're thinking about
1:18:49
Speaker 2: everything in terms of computation, which adds this extra layer
1:18:52
Speaker 2: of complexity of how it all works.
1:18:55
Speaker 1: So do you think that... So every decision point is
1:19:00
Speaker 1: a split in perception of reality, correct?
1:19:03
Speaker 2: Every instance of your neuron firing anything, not even something
1:19:06
Speaker 2: you're doing consciously. So there's trillions of them happening every second.
1:19:11
Speaker 1: And so you think that, you think that all of
1:19:16
Speaker 1: those realities actually exist? Yes. Correct?
1:19:20
Speaker 2: They're all computed at once, basically. And you're on one
1:19:24
Speaker 2: of them. And in fact, there's some ideas from some,
1:19:27
Speaker 2: you know.
1:19:27
Speaker 1: So I have a question. Sure, sure, sure. I'm at
1:19:30
Speaker 1: a decision point right now. There's a bonus question here.
1:19:33
Speaker 2: Let's go.
1:19:34
Speaker 1: So if I ask the bonus question. Yeah. then that
1:19:39
Speaker 1: we're at a decision point right where a wise out.
1:19:41
Speaker 1: So if I ask the bonus question that transfers me
1:19:44
Speaker 1: into another reality. Yes. If I don't ask the bonus question.
1:19:49
Speaker 2: Exactly.
1:19:49
Speaker 1: That transfers me into another alternate reality. Correct. So.
1:19:54
Speaker 2: But let me help with that. One thing that is
1:19:57
Speaker 2: entering the picture that changes the, how dire what you're
1:20:01
Speaker 2: describing is right now is error correction. There seems to
1:20:05
Speaker 2: be the disability to error correct. is a very unique
1:20:09
Speaker 2: ability of conscious agents like ourselves that allows us to
1:20:13
Speaker 2: actually steer to some degree that even if we went
1:20:16
Speaker 2: forward this way, it allows us to steer back closer
1:20:19
Speaker 2: towards this other world that we might have ended up with.
1:20:21
Speaker 2: So for example, if you ask the bonus question, but
1:20:25
Speaker 2: there was a, I don't know, a preference of yours
1:20:27
Speaker 2: of where you wanted the conversation to go. And then
1:20:29
Speaker 2: by asking the bonus question, you felt like, oh, it
1:20:33
Speaker 2: took us too far afield from where I wanted to go.
1:20:35
Speaker 2: You can error correct. you can start steering the conversation
1:20:38
Speaker 2: back there, and we can still end up pretty much there.
1:20:41
Speaker 2: So world lines can split. They can also re-merge.
1:20:45
Speaker 1: So if you're making a decision, and that is the
1:20:48
Speaker 1: split of two worlds, two realities, two perceptions of reality, whatever,
1:20:54
Speaker 1: then you really aren't making a decision, correct? Because both
1:20:57
Speaker 1: decisions have been, both sides of that decision have been made.
1:21:01
Speaker 1: And so how do you know which way you're going
1:21:04
Speaker 1: to flow?
1:21:04
Speaker 2: You don't.
1:21:05
Speaker 1: Do you see what I'm getting at? Yeah, yeah.
1:21:07
Speaker 2: You're asking the deepest question that bothers the most amount
1:21:10
Speaker 2: of people, which is the whole question of free will, which, no,
1:21:14
Speaker 2: you don't have it. But you do have the perception
1:21:17
Speaker 2: of it that determines how the world will look like
1:21:20
Speaker 2: to you. So people find a lot of salvation and
1:21:24
Speaker 2: solace in the idea that they're kind of the masters
1:21:29
Speaker 2: of their own reality. But the reality of it is
1:21:32
Speaker 2: that these things are just going to happen And no,
1:21:34
Speaker 2: you don't know which one of them you are. You
1:21:36
Speaker 2: are who you are. And there is some conversation that
1:21:40
Speaker 2: is happening in computational physics about what it would be
1:21:43
Speaker 2: like to be the observer. So like the thing that
1:21:46
Speaker 2: is computing all the paths at once. But that's not us.
1:21:50
Speaker 2: We're the fragments of whatever that is, right? And you
1:21:52
Speaker 2: can think of it as God. You can think of
1:21:54
Speaker 2: it as whatever it is that is comfortable for you.
1:21:58
Speaker 2: But for all intents and purposes, separate agents like ourselves
1:22:02
Speaker 2: are not experiencing the world lines in their totality. You're
1:22:06
Speaker 2: always in one of those decision split moments. So your
1:22:10
Speaker 2: history or your world line is one that is constantly
1:22:13
Speaker 2: kind of traveling through these, but it adds to the
1:22:16
Speaker 2: collective to basically have every possible experience. That's the point
1:22:21
Speaker 2: of it. Basically, it wants to know what it's like
1:22:24
Speaker 2: to have all the possible kinds of experiences, and you're
1:22:27
Speaker 2: just one of them, basically. And again, there are these some,
1:22:31
Speaker 2: I guess, more, elaborate ideas about how maybe when we're
1:22:36
Speaker 2: entering certain heightened states, maybe we are experiencing more than
1:22:39
Speaker 2: one world line, things like this. But if we want
1:22:43
Speaker 2: to really ask the question seriously, this would have to
1:22:46
Speaker 2: be testable. And people don't know, but this is actually
1:22:48
Speaker 2: a pretty... The reason that quantum computers work... So if
1:22:52
Speaker 2: you ask someone like David Deutsch, who's a famous physicist
1:22:54
Speaker 2: who actually wrote something called the Deutsch equations, which are
1:22:58
Speaker 2: responsible for being able to make quantum computers. Quantum computers...
1:23:03
Speaker 2: are a real thing.
1:23:04
Speaker 1: They work.
1:23:04
Speaker 2: They do what they do. And there's very complicated science
1:23:07
Speaker 2: behind them that we understand to some degree quite well.
1:23:11
Speaker 2: Why am I mentioning this? Well, quantum computers, and I'm
1:23:15
Speaker 2: mentioning David Deutsch because he's a serious scientist who definitely
1:23:20
Speaker 2: understands the technical part of it. And according to him
1:23:23
Speaker 2: and many scientists like him, the only way that quantum
1:23:26
Speaker 2: computers can do what they do is if these world
1:23:29
Speaker 2: lines are real. Otherwise, it would never work. Because what
1:23:32
Speaker 2: they do is literally borrow computation from the parallel worlds.
1:23:37
Speaker 2: And it's almost like we're computing together. It's like in
1:23:40
Speaker 2: these parallel worlds that are adjacent to ours. And I
1:23:43
Speaker 2: do mean actually, like straight up, like you and me,
1:23:45
Speaker 2: there's another one like us. There's just a little bit
1:23:48
Speaker 2: to the side of us in this hyperspace in which
1:23:51
Speaker 2: you were not sitting like this, but maybe one finger
1:23:53
Speaker 2: was up or something a little different, but not very different.
1:23:58
Speaker 2: And then the further you go, it becomes more and
1:24:00
Speaker 2: more and more different. There's like variation, right? But what happens,
1:24:04
Speaker 2: according to people like David Deutsch, what happens when you
1:24:06
Speaker 2: do a quantum compute is that you actually, the reason
1:24:10
Speaker 2: you can do these enormous calculations in an instance is
1:24:13
Speaker 2: because the calculation itself is being done across the worlds.
1:24:17
Speaker 2: So you're not the only one making that calculation. All
1:24:19
Speaker 2: of these parallel worlds with scientists with the same exact
1:24:22
Speaker 2: machine across the worlds are doing the same thing with you.
1:24:26
Speaker 2: And they know you're doing it too. And they're using
1:24:28
Speaker 2: special equations to kind of determine where we are on
1:24:31
Speaker 2: the map. So to some degree, do the thing you're
1:24:33
Speaker 2: asking about, which is like, which one are we in
1:24:35
Speaker 2: this whole thing? And what is the probability of that
1:24:38
Speaker 2: and all that? And that lateral computation across the world
1:24:41
Speaker 2: is what allows us to do this enormous calculation all
1:24:44
Speaker 2: at once. See what I'm saying? So to some degree,
1:24:48
Speaker 2: you can say that the only reason we can do
1:24:50
Speaker 2: quantum computation is because these worlds are completely real. And
1:24:54
Speaker 2: that is something that obviously is not always spoken about
1:24:57
Speaker 2: because it's It just kind of sounds like out there,
1:24:59
Speaker 2: but it's not a fringe crazy idea. That's a pretty
1:25:02
Speaker 2: well-established idea in some physicists' mind.
1:25:06
Speaker 1: Wow. You told Danny Jones that we're the AGI. Yes.
1:25:11
Speaker 1: What do you mean by that?
1:25:12
Speaker 2: This is something I already told you, which is that
1:25:14
Speaker 2: we are that thing that we think will emerge in
1:25:17
Speaker 2: the machine.
1:25:17
Speaker 1: We're it.
1:25:18
Speaker 2: So we are that AGI. It's just that all these
1:25:22
Speaker 2: tools are reflections of us. So, like, if you really
1:25:24
Speaker 2: think about, okay, so if you think about what you
1:25:26
Speaker 2: do with ChatGPT, right, a lot of people are really
1:25:28
Speaker 2: scared and some people are excited, right? But, like, think
1:25:31
Speaker 2: about it. You can do anything, literally anything. Why don't
1:25:36
Speaker 2: people do that?
1:25:39
Speaker 1: Because they don't believe that they can.
1:25:42
Speaker 2: Yeah, there's a failure of imagination. But yesterday I had
1:25:44
Speaker 2: a podcast and I was talking to this and, you know,
1:25:46
Speaker 2: there was some trepidation expressed about AI. And I said, well,
1:25:49
Speaker 2: because he said, like, my goal, which is a beautiful goal,
1:25:52
Speaker 2: he said, My goal is to create a more like
1:25:56
Speaker 2: reconnect with other humans. And I'm all for it. I
1:25:58
Speaker 2: think we should definitely do that. But I said, but
1:26:00
Speaker 2: watch this. You can use ChatGPT or any other AI
1:26:03
Speaker 2: to actually help you do that.
1:26:07
Speaker 1: I've been using Ridge for a while, and what I
1:26:09
Speaker 1: like about them is they take everyday carry items and
1:26:13
Speaker 1: make them simpler, tougher, and more functional. And now, they've
1:26:17
Speaker 1: done it with portable charging. When you travel, the charging
1:26:20
Speaker 1: situation gets annoying fast. Your phone, headphones, watch, Kindle, everything
1:26:25
Speaker 1: seems to need a different cord. Before you know it,
1:26:28
Speaker 1: you've got cables, adapters, and backup chargers just to keep
1:26:32
Speaker 1: everything powered. That's what makes the Ridge 5-in-1 Travel Power
1:26:35
Speaker 1: Bank so useful. It has built-in cables and lets you
1:26:38
Speaker 1: charge multiple devices at the same time with one power
1:26:41
Speaker 1: bank and no extra cables. You've got MagSafe wireless charging,
1:26:46
Speaker 1: an Apple Watch charger, lightning, USB-C, basically every way you
1:26:51
Speaker 1: need to charge. all in one premium device. It has
1:26:54
Speaker 1: 20 watts of power, so it charges your phone fast.
1:26:57
Speaker 1: And with 10,000 milliamp hours of capacity, you've got up
1:27:01
Speaker 1: to three full phone charges in your pocket. It also
1:27:04
Speaker 1: has MagSafe compatible wireless charging, so you can keep it
1:27:07
Speaker 1: magnetically attached to the back of your iPhone for extra
1:27:10
Speaker 1: power on the go. And, like everything Ridge makes, it's
1:27:14
Speaker 1: built to last. Free shipping, a 99-day risk-free trial, and
1:27:18
Speaker 1: a lifetime warranty. This is the last power bank you'll
1:27:22
Speaker 1: ever need. One thing to pack, five ways to power.
1:27:25
Speaker 1: You can find Ridge's power bank at Best Buy or
1:27:28
Speaker 1: our listeners can get 10% off at Ridge.com by using
1:27:31
Speaker 1: code SRS at checkout. Just head to Ridge.com and use
1:27:35
Speaker 1: code SRS and you're all set. After you purchase, they'll
1:27:39
Speaker 1: ask where you heard about them. Please support our show
1:27:41
Speaker 1: and tell them our show sent you.
1:28:18
Speaker 2: All you got to do is ask the right questions.
1:28:19
Speaker 2: You can say, hey, I want to start a company
1:28:23
Speaker 2: that actually utilizes AI, but I want to make sure
1:28:28
Speaker 2: that it also helps people connect with one another, and
1:28:31
Speaker 2: I want to utilize the power of 15 people to
1:28:34
Speaker 2: do the work of 100 people. Instead of firing people, which,
1:28:37
Speaker 2: by the way, this is what's happening. I don't know
1:28:38
Speaker 2: if you know this, but people are very afraid of
1:28:41
Speaker 2: software engineering jobs disappearing because of AI.
1:28:44
Speaker 1: I've heard of that.
1:28:45
Speaker 2: Well, it didn't. It went up. Because what happened is
1:28:50
Speaker 2: that a lot of companies, instead of thinking in a
1:28:52
Speaker 2: subtractive way, they started thinking in an expansive way. They said,
1:28:56
Speaker 2: instead of firing, we don't need these 10 people. Instead
1:28:59
Speaker 2: of doing that, they said, how can we do the
1:29:01
Speaker 2: job of five times more people with the people that
1:29:04
Speaker 2: we have? Because now we can do that. Actually, when
1:29:07
Speaker 2: they did that, they realized, oh my God, we actually
1:29:09
Speaker 2: need more people. Also, more people can do it because
1:29:12
Speaker 2: it's more based on logic and not so much you
1:29:15
Speaker 2: knowing all the codes. I told them, look, you can
1:29:18
Speaker 2: ask it, say, I want to build a company based
1:29:20
Speaker 2: on AI that would help people do more work, but
1:29:25
Speaker 2: also connect on a meaningful level. How do I do that?
1:29:29
Speaker 2: It will help you think about this. Oh, maybe I
1:29:31
Speaker 2: need to allocate half of the day for us just
1:29:34
Speaker 2: doing research, and then half of the other day, the
1:29:37
Speaker 2: second half of the day, us just like sitting in
1:29:39
Speaker 2: a thing, shooting the shit, exchanging ideas. Would that be
1:29:42
Speaker 2: more beneficial, less beneficial? How do I do that? I
1:29:44
Speaker 2: wanna optimize human connection. You can do that. So the
1:29:49
Speaker 2: point that I'm making with the AGI thing is that essentially,
1:29:52
Speaker 2: what I told you with the alignment problem. We are
1:29:55
Speaker 2: inside of one of these kind of simulations and we
1:29:58
Speaker 2: are given more and more advanced tools to see what
1:30:02
Speaker 2: we do with them. It's part of the alignment. So
1:30:05
Speaker 2: now that, you know, people always said like, if I
1:30:07
Speaker 2: would have the $ 8 billion that this rich person has,
1:30:11
Speaker 2: oh boy, would I do the right thing? Most people
1:30:14
Speaker 2: just make a mess. It's very difficult to know what
1:30:16
Speaker 2: to do no matter how much money or power you have.
1:30:19
Speaker 2: And ChatGPT is a proof of that because There's literally
1:30:23
Speaker 2: nothing you can't do with it. It only is determined
1:30:29
Speaker 2: by how much imagination you have. You can sit down
1:30:32
Speaker 2: and learn anything about any field, what it's about, what
1:30:36
Speaker 2: are the blind spots, is there something to be done
1:30:39
Speaker 2: that wasn't already done? You can ask all the questions
1:30:42
Speaker 2: in the universe and actually do something super meaningful with
1:30:44
Speaker 2: your life. Or you can ask it to write your email.
1:30:48
Speaker 2: The choice is yours. Ultimately, this creative moment is... essentially
1:30:52
Speaker 2: what connects us to the totality of the simulation. That
1:30:56
Speaker 2: moment of this decision tree that we're talking about is
1:30:59
Speaker 2: the same one that in you feels like a choice.
1:31:02
Speaker 2: So that creative moment of something truly potentially novel can
1:31:07
Speaker 2: only come from conscious agents like ourselves. We can never
1:31:10
Speaker 2: be replaced because we're it. There's nothing else that it's
1:31:13
Speaker 2: like to be something. It's only like agents like ourselves, basically.
1:31:18
Speaker 1: Why do you think our perception of time speeds up
1:31:21
Speaker 1: as we age?
1:31:23
Speaker 2: Oh, well, there's a lot of things to it. Some
1:31:25
Speaker 2: of it can be said towards something kind of more,
1:31:28
Speaker 2: you know, mystical, like maybe, you know, time is ramping
1:31:32
Speaker 2: up actually. The other one you can say, well, it's
1:31:35
Speaker 2: just a matter of being there, done that, right? Like
1:31:39
Speaker 2: if it's not a thing you're not familiar with, if
1:31:42
Speaker 2: it's a thing you're not familiar with, then your brain
1:31:44
Speaker 2: is really paying attention because he's trying to learn it.
1:31:46
Speaker 2: So every moment stretches. When you're just doing the same
1:31:50
Speaker 2: thing over and over again, which happens more of, the
1:31:53
Speaker 2: older you get, then your brain kind of deletes. Like
1:31:56
Speaker 2: it's just like, yeah, this is going to work. It
1:31:58
Speaker 2: collapses into a non-experience. You're just kind of driving. You
1:32:02
Speaker 2: don't remember that at all. When you're a kid, everything
1:32:05
Speaker 2: is like super novel. Everything is super new. When you
1:32:07
Speaker 2: become older, it's kind of like, ah, yeah, I know
1:32:09
Speaker 2: what that is. But if you, you know, take the
1:32:11
Speaker 2: time with it, or if you do like you go
1:32:13
Speaker 2: to a new country or notice that those feel longer.
1:32:16
Speaker 2: So that tells you that probably there's a lot of
1:32:18
Speaker 2: psychological kind of time dilation happening. But I'm very open
1:32:22
Speaker 2: to the possibility that even physical time is ramping up
1:32:24
Speaker 2: because maybe we're kind of being, you know, the whole
1:32:27
Speaker 2: idea of the singularity. We're actually entering some kind of
1:32:31
Speaker 2: a world where the actual difference between this moment and
1:32:36
Speaker 2: the next becomes so enormous that everything feels like it
1:32:39
Speaker 2: just accelerates. And that's also very possible. In fact, I
1:32:44
Speaker 2: think we're in it now. I think the reason that
1:32:46
Speaker 2: everything kind of feels very tumultuous is because we're entering
1:32:50
Speaker 2: the stage where everything just changing very rapidly. And we
1:32:54
Speaker 2: are trying to catch up. We're just trying to, you know,
1:32:56
Speaker 2: you kind of have to take a moment and sit
1:32:58
Speaker 2: back and allow yourself. But I think that these abilities
1:33:01
Speaker 2: to do that, to be able to just step back
1:33:03
Speaker 2: and allow yourself to be more in the present moment,
1:33:06
Speaker 2: are actually key for being able to become more, I guess,
1:33:11
Speaker 2: computationally literate. Because if information will be moving really fast,
1:33:17
Speaker 2: The only negative thing about it is that if you
1:33:19
Speaker 2: can't cope with it, like if it's just too fast
1:33:21
Speaker 2: in such a way that causes you to be, there's
1:33:25
Speaker 2: like dissonance, you know, it's uncomfortable, then yeah, it's not
1:33:28
Speaker 2: a good thing. But if you can think on 10
1:33:30
Speaker 2: channels at once and you can totally handle it and
1:33:33
Speaker 2: it's just, the experience is even more, it's more profound,
1:33:37
Speaker 2: it's more beautiful, you're more there, well then there's no issue,
1:33:40
Speaker 2: it's beautiful, like yeah, bring it on. So people would
1:33:44
Speaker 2: need to develop these skills of presence, non-attachment, all the
1:33:47
Speaker 2: basically the stuff that is being spoken about in Eastern traditions,
1:33:51
Speaker 2: they are key for being able to interact with these
1:33:54
Speaker 2: systems in a better and better way and also not
1:33:57
Speaker 2: to become slaves to them because that's always a danger
1:34:00
Speaker 2: that can happen. We can just kind of pigeonhole ourselves.
1:34:03
Speaker 2: We can kind of like get locked into this weird
1:34:05
Speaker 2: cycle where we only use it for kind of like
1:34:08
Speaker 2: repetitive tasks and it just gets locked in this weird thing, right?
1:34:12
Speaker 2: So that it's up to us to think out instead
1:34:15
Speaker 2: of thinking out. I'll do the thinking small.
1:34:21
Speaker 1: Simulation. This is weird. I just had this conversation. I
1:34:24
Speaker 1: think it was last Friday. We talked about it for
1:34:26
Speaker 1: a couple hours just in the other room. And I mean,
1:34:34
Speaker 1: so if this is some type of a simulation, is
1:34:39
Speaker 1: your perception, are we all experiencing the same reality? I
1:34:43
Speaker 1: guess is what I'm asking. Or am I in my
1:34:47
Speaker 1: own perceived fucking movie? I mean, I don't know any
1:34:53
Speaker 1: other way to put it, but I mean, are you here?
1:34:57
Speaker 1: I think about this shit all the time. I mean,
1:34:58
Speaker 1: are you, I mean, when you think about things like manifestation,
1:35:03
Speaker 1: you know, which I think probably works, there's so many
1:35:11
Speaker 1: things in my own life that I've, that, I never
1:35:19
Speaker 1: thought I would have the opportunity to experience some of
1:35:22
Speaker 1: the things that I've experienced. And going way back to
1:35:28
Speaker 1: right now, even just right now, I can't believe that
1:35:35
Speaker 1: the operation that I've built with my team is where
1:35:38
Speaker 1: it is. It doesn't seem real. None of this fucking
1:35:43
Speaker 1: seems real to me. What's going on in the world
1:35:47
Speaker 1: doesn't seem fucking real to me. The success doesn't seem
1:35:52
Speaker 1: real to me. The surviving some of the shit that
1:35:55
Speaker 1: I've survived doesn't seem real to me. I mean, it's,
1:35:59
Speaker 1: and so if I'm making any damn sense, I mean,
1:36:04
Speaker 1: is this, am I alone in my reality? And these
1:36:07
Speaker 1: are all just projections of things that I've created in
1:36:10
Speaker 1: my head. Everything from my kids to my wife, to you,
1:36:12
Speaker 1: to this fucking build, everything. Or are we all sharing
1:36:19
Speaker 1: one reality?
1:36:20
Speaker 2: I have to be very careful here because it's a.
1:36:25
Speaker 1: Am I making sense?
1:36:27
Speaker 2: Perfect sense.
1:36:27
Speaker 1: Okay.
1:36:30
Speaker 2: So, okay, let's try and keep it as simple as possible.
1:36:34
Speaker 2: Yes to your question, you are in your own reality. However,
1:36:39
Speaker 2: the agents that are represented in your reality are real
1:36:43
Speaker 2: in their own reality. So just like when you go into,
1:36:46
Speaker 2: let's say, a virtual world, right? Like you put Apple
1:36:49
Speaker 2: Vision Pro or whatever, and we go into this, I
1:36:52
Speaker 2: think there's some projects like this, like Earth 2 or something,
1:36:55
Speaker 2: or I think Earth 3 or something else, but it
1:36:57
Speaker 2: doesn't matter. Like a virtual space where we meet, right?
1:37:01
Speaker 2: You're meeting the projections inside of that world, but they
1:37:06
Speaker 2: represent a real person. You see what I'm saying? So
1:37:09
Speaker 2: in that world, if you try to herd them physically,
1:37:12
Speaker 2: you can't really. But maybe if you try and hurt
1:37:15
Speaker 2: them psychologically, you can, because there's a real person there.
1:37:18
Speaker 2: They're receiving the information, right? So imagine if the system
1:37:22
Speaker 2: built such a safe environment that basically even psychologically, you
1:37:28
Speaker 2: can't hurt other people if you really try, because you're
1:37:30
Speaker 2: hurting just their kind of avatars. But the system is
1:37:34
Speaker 2: still registering what you're doing, and it's informing the rest
1:37:37
Speaker 2: of them about your behavior. So then they get to
1:37:41
Speaker 2: choose how they interact with the projection of it. So basically,
1:37:44
Speaker 2: if you did this or that in the world of
1:37:48
Speaker 2: your wife, instead of where she is, that translates to
1:37:52
Speaker 2: real actions, depending on the situation that she finds herself
1:37:56
Speaker 2: with your avatar. And it's only in the moments where
1:37:59
Speaker 2: we enter that field of collaboration or love, like actual one,
1:38:04
Speaker 2: not the one that you can kind of fake by
1:38:05
Speaker 2: behaving a certain way, but like when you really feel it,
1:38:09
Speaker 2: that's when you start feeling, you start getting closer to
1:38:12
Speaker 2: what that conscious agent really is. And if you're fully
1:38:15
Speaker 2: immersed in this love field, then you will experience their actual,
1:38:19
Speaker 2: just like you would imagine in this life. And notice
1:38:22
Speaker 2: that it does feel different. You don't, even with the
1:38:25
Speaker 2: closest people in your life, you don't always feel it.
1:38:28
Speaker 2: But when you do, you have to admit that it
1:38:31
Speaker 2: feels different it feels different and the world feels different
1:38:34
Speaker 2: all of a sudden there's this like oh you're just
1:38:36
Speaker 2: here there's like a thing there's a there's a this
1:38:38
Speaker 2: harmony flowing there's like a wow with children it's very
1:38:41
Speaker 2: easy to see not what they annoy you but when
1:38:43
Speaker 2: you like really like they're with them especially with them
1:38:46
Speaker 2: because it's like so pure right But if you're having
1:38:50
Speaker 2: it with an adult and you manage to kind of
1:38:52
Speaker 2: remove all the psychological kind of imperatives and like what
1:38:55
Speaker 2: I think you think and all of these like psychological games,
1:38:59
Speaker 2: all of a sudden, if you just lower the volume
1:39:01
Speaker 2: on this and you're just in the presence of someone else,
1:39:03
Speaker 2: which is very possible, there's a different kind of experience
1:39:06
Speaker 2: available that is of the flavor of the real other
1:39:10
Speaker 2: conscious agent. And if I understood the whole like kind
1:39:13
Speaker 2: of what it all trying to culminate in, is that
1:39:17
Speaker 2: eventually it wants all the agents of one simulation to
1:39:20
Speaker 2: enter that field. And that's when, essentially, that's what ascension is.
1:39:24
Speaker 2: It's like, that's when you fully unify as like one,
1:39:27
Speaker 2: like truly, truly feel each other. Now, I'm not talking
1:39:29
Speaker 2: about in this like, kind of like, you know, this fakeable, oh,
1:39:34
Speaker 2: I see you.
1:39:34
Speaker 1: I know what you're talking about, actual, genuine.
1:39:37
Speaker 2: Genuine, like true connection in the moment, right? So, and
1:39:41
Speaker 2: camaraderie holds some elements of that, but camaraderie is more
1:39:45
Speaker 2: of a, around a task, right? So you're joined by
1:39:48
Speaker 2: a task. Imagine doing that just on command, just like
1:39:52
Speaker 2: a muscle. So yes, you're in your own simulation, but
1:39:55
Speaker 2: you can also enter more in the space of others
1:39:58
Speaker 2: if you manage to enter that space more.
1:40:00
Speaker 1: With other people. What do you think happens when we die?
1:40:09
Speaker 2: Depending on what happened to you while you were alive.
1:40:12
Speaker 2: So basically, I do think that there's serious data for reincarnation.
1:40:17
Speaker 2: And also it makes sense in terms of everything else
1:40:18
Speaker 2: that I've seen. So it's almost like the soul is
1:40:21
Speaker 2: basically the ultimate hard drive. It contains all the possible
1:40:25
Speaker 2: experiential pathways, but it strips away, it kind of reformulates itself,
1:40:32
Speaker 2: which is, I guess, what you can say is the,
1:40:33
Speaker 2: you know, when it plays your life to you, which
1:40:35
Speaker 2: is a pretty established kind of experience. And then it
1:40:39
Speaker 2: wipes everything that was already done before clean. There's no
1:40:43
Speaker 2: need for that. and only keeps the super novel experiences
1:40:46
Speaker 2: that never happened before. And then it proceeds to the
1:40:49
Speaker 2: next life, to the next simulation, and it does it
1:40:51
Speaker 2: again and again. And eventually all of these hard drives
1:40:54
Speaker 2: arrive back at the source, and they inform the source
1:40:57
Speaker 2: about what it's like to have every possible experience. And
1:41:01
Speaker 2: that is due to basically, it kind of goes to
1:41:03
Speaker 2: the heart of why I saw these simulations happen, which
1:41:06
Speaker 2: essentially is, it's the attempt to answer the ultimate questions,
1:41:11
Speaker 2: like why actually? Like, why for real? Like, of everything. Now,
1:41:15
Speaker 2: people tend to think this, in Christian circles, this is
1:41:19
Speaker 2: a little blasphemous. Like, they do see it as, that
1:41:22
Speaker 2: kind of utterance is blasphemous because it's like, what are
1:41:24
Speaker 2: you saying? God doesn't know? Then you don't, then you're
1:41:27
Speaker 2: not talking about God because God is perfect and God
1:41:29
Speaker 2: knows everything. Okay, I understand. But let's pretend he doesn't.
1:41:33
Speaker 2: Let's pretend that there's one thing that God doesn't know,
1:41:35
Speaker 2: which is why, right? And what I saw is that
1:41:38
Speaker 2: basically that's the, it's the answer collecting itself. That's the
1:41:41
Speaker 2: relationship that, that, all conscious agents actually have with the source,
1:41:45
Speaker 2: which is they're the answer to the question. But at
1:41:48
Speaker 2: the same time, it also allows for this processing of
1:41:53
Speaker 2: how it's like to just let go, just truly just
1:41:55
Speaker 2: let go of the question altogether. And both of those
1:41:58
Speaker 2: are being trained at the same time. Because it's, and
1:42:00
Speaker 2: this is, it gets a little, this is kind of novel,
1:42:04
Speaker 2: because it's, you know, it's very dramatic. But from what
1:42:07
Speaker 2: I saw is basically, if you're this infinite being that
1:42:11
Speaker 2: can do anything, then technically nothing matters because it's like
1:42:15
Speaker 2: I can do anything and there's no price for anything.
1:42:18
Speaker 2: You would separate yourself with these. If there's one thing
1:42:21
Speaker 2: you don't know, let's say, which is why you're there,
1:42:24
Speaker 2: then the two things that would make sense to do, one,
1:42:28
Speaker 2: try and answer that question. That's interesting. I actually want
1:42:30
Speaker 2: to know. You would create a process by which the
1:42:33
Speaker 2: answer is collecting itself. Then you would also allow for
1:42:38
Speaker 2: the game of letting go to be played through the
1:42:40
Speaker 2: simulations as well. which I guess you can think of
1:42:42
Speaker 2: it more like the Eastern tradition, like the monk that
1:42:45
Speaker 2: goes into the cave and feels complete bliss without anything,
1:42:48
Speaker 2: just kind of being.
1:42:48
Speaker 1: There, right?
1:42:49
Speaker 2: That's a pretty good skill if you are a being
1:42:53
Speaker 2: that will be there forever and you don't know why, right?
1:42:55
Speaker 2: It's actually kind of cool to be able to just like,
1:42:57
Speaker 2: it doesn't matter, and just kind of be there, right,
1:42:59
Speaker 2: in pure love. So again, setting aside the fact that
1:43:03
Speaker 2: a lot of people believe that that's what God already
1:43:05
Speaker 2: is and must be, completely respect that, no problem. But
1:43:08
Speaker 2: let's pretend that that's the picture. then what happens at
1:43:11
Speaker 2: the end of all this process unfolding is that when
1:43:14
Speaker 2: the answer fully collects itself, and there's this black box
1:43:17
Speaker 2: with the answer in it, like the actual answer, then
1:43:20
Speaker 2: the choice of whether you open that box or not
1:43:23
Speaker 2: is the ultimate choice. Because when everything is said and done,
1:43:28
Speaker 2: everything that was possible to do, so in the beginning
1:43:31
Speaker 2: was the word, in the end there's the choice. And
1:43:34
Speaker 2: that choice is, do you open that box? And you
1:43:37
Speaker 2: don't know what's in the box. You don't know if
1:43:39
Speaker 2: it's a thing that you actually don't want to know
1:43:41
Speaker 2: or it's a thing you really want to know. You
1:43:43
Speaker 2: don't know. The choice has to be real. If I
1:43:46
Speaker 2: put $ 5 million, if I just tell you, hey, Sean,
1:43:48
Speaker 2: would you do, you know, whatever for this amount of money?
1:43:52
Speaker 2: Let's make a ridiculous amount of money because, you know,
1:43:53
Speaker 2: kind of like, I don't know, I put $ 5 billion
1:43:57
Speaker 2: on the table, but I don't. I just tell you, hey,
1:43:59
Speaker 2: if I would give $ 5 billion, would you do X?
1:44:03
Speaker 2: You'll tell me to fuck off. I was like, of
1:44:04
Speaker 2: course I wouldn't, whatever it was. But if I put
1:44:07
Speaker 2: $ 5 billion on a table, that's a different story because
1:44:10
Speaker 2: now there's real... It's an actual thing you're saying no to, right? So,
1:44:16
Speaker 2: the ultimate choice would mean nothing if you just postulate.
1:44:19
Speaker 2: You're like, oh, yeah, I wouldn't open it.
1:44:21
Speaker 1: Well, you don't know.
1:44:23
Speaker 2: If I put the actual answer in the box and
1:44:25
Speaker 2: it's guaranteed to be in the box, like that's the
1:44:28
Speaker 2: actual answer, then you walking away means something or you
1:44:34
Speaker 2: opening it means something. But that From what I saw,
1:44:37
Speaker 2: that's kind of like the connection that we have to
1:44:39
Speaker 2: the ultimate, which is that we're the process by which
1:44:42
Speaker 2: all of this is unfolding, basically.
1:44:46
Speaker 1: What is it about DMT that you think gives you
1:44:49
Speaker 1: access to this other?
1:44:51
Speaker 2: I don't think it's necessarily DMT. I think it's a
1:44:53
Speaker 2: lot of altered states. Some people can naturally enter a
1:44:55
Speaker 2: lot of these kind of perceptual spaces. They're more talented.
1:44:59
Speaker 2: They're more sensitive. I'm not sure. But DMT is definitely
1:45:02
Speaker 2: not the only way or not even the preferable way.
1:45:05
Speaker 2: I'm a long-term meditator. I've been doing Vipassana for years.
1:45:08
Speaker 2: I've done retreats. And you can enter very interesting states
1:45:12
Speaker 2: just by focusing your mind in a particular way. But
1:45:15
Speaker 2: they're not usually accompanied by the pyrotechnics that DMT gives you.
1:45:19
Speaker 2: It can, but not to that degree. DMT is really like,
1:45:22
Speaker 2: it stands out in terms of the visuals or the content.
1:45:27
Speaker 2: But I don't think DMT is the only access. One
1:45:30
Speaker 2: thing I can say about Christianity in particular is You know,
1:45:36
Speaker 2: my wife was raised Catholic, but she, you know, as
1:45:40
Speaker 2: many Catholics, and this is not a dig at Catholics,
1:45:43
Speaker 2: but it's just a fact that a lot of kind
1:45:44
Speaker 2: of ex-Catholics are very kind of traumatized from the guilt,
1:45:48
Speaker 2: you know, that whole stuff. And she was one of them.
1:45:53
Speaker 2: But she never stopped praying. So, like, sometimes she would pray.
1:45:56
Speaker 2: And I asked her, and she said that when she prays,
1:46:00
Speaker 2: she feels a different presence than any other emotions. And
1:46:05
Speaker 2: as someone who never experienced something like this, I asked her, like,
1:46:07
Speaker 2: but what do you mean? Like, how do you know
1:46:09
Speaker 2: that it's different than just feeling euphoria or something? She's like,
1:46:13
Speaker 2: I know it's different. It's just like you can hear
1:46:14
Speaker 2: my voice now and you know it's not your voice.
1:46:17
Speaker 2: So it's kind of like that. Like, there's a different
1:46:18
Speaker 2: thing there. I said, how interesting.
1:46:21
Speaker 1: Okay.
1:46:21
Speaker 2: And then I understood that it's very likely and probably
1:46:25
Speaker 2: exactly what's going on. Many Christians who do believe fully,
1:46:30
Speaker 2: they don't just believe kind of like with their head.
1:46:32
Speaker 2: They feel it in their bodies. They know what it's
1:46:35
Speaker 2: like to be in the presence of that. And I
1:46:36
Speaker 2: would say that's one form of feeling the truth of
1:46:39
Speaker 2: the situation. And knowing the details matters a lot less,
1:46:44
Speaker 2: I think, than just being in harmony with the field,
1:46:47
Speaker 2: just kind of allowing yourself to be a good node
1:46:51
Speaker 2: in the field, basically. I think that's way more important.
1:46:56
Speaker 1: So even if it isn't the only avenue in, what
1:47:00
Speaker 1: is it that DMT is doing to the mind that
1:47:04
Speaker 1: is lifting the veil?
1:47:06
Speaker 2: We're not sure. We know that it reduces a lot
1:47:08
Speaker 2: of activity in the brain, which is interesting. It's almost
1:47:11
Speaker 2: like maybe it makes the whatever else.
1:47:14
Speaker 1: It reduces activity in the brain.
1:47:15
Speaker 2: Yeah, it reduces a lot of the activity in the brain.
1:47:17
Speaker 2: And now that's not a clear-cut statement because very often
1:47:22
Speaker 2: lack of activation is also a state, which means that
1:47:26
Speaker 2: maybe it's just a state that is more conducive to
1:47:29
Speaker 2: receiving more information. But the brain is very often less
1:47:32
Speaker 2: active in many ways. So maybe what's happening, which is
1:47:39
Speaker 2: something that Dr. Andrew Gallimore is talking about, maybe what's
1:47:43
Speaker 2: happening is that basically this is a filter. So the
1:47:46
Speaker 2: more active the filter is, the more it kind of
1:47:49
Speaker 2: solidifies a particular kind of experience. But maybe what DMT does,
1:47:54
Speaker 2: it loosens the kind of the walls of the framework,
1:48:00
Speaker 2: the reality we're in, and it allows more to flow in.
1:48:04
Speaker 2: That more is real, but usually you don't have to
1:48:08
Speaker 2: process it, so it just kind of feels very jarring
1:48:10
Speaker 2: because it's way more than you used to deal with
1:48:13
Speaker 2: or that you even need to deal with. The brain
1:48:16
Speaker 2: probably optimized the perfect kind of dialed in, the perfect
1:48:20
Speaker 2: rendering for you to exist, eat, survive, mate, all of
1:48:25
Speaker 2: the right things for you to survive as an agent
1:48:27
Speaker 2: in this world. But if there are many, many more
1:48:30
Speaker 2: worlds outside, so if you think of every world as
1:48:32
Speaker 2: like a bubble, like an island, right? The brain would
1:48:36
Speaker 2: create all the necessary tools to deal with whatever is
1:48:39
Speaker 2: needs to be dealt with in the physical three-dimensional environment
1:48:42
Speaker 2: as we perceive it. But if you go outside of that,
1:48:44
Speaker 2: there might be enormous oceans of just kind of information
1:48:49
Speaker 2: that doesn't really collect into something coherent, but that information
1:48:54
Speaker 2: eventually makes up other worlds. So in order to go
1:48:57
Speaker 2: to this next island where there's other rules and some
1:49:00
Speaker 2: other laws of physics, you have to kind of travel
1:49:03
Speaker 2: through this chaos, right? And then when you arrive there,
1:49:06
Speaker 2: things might look completely different in ways that you never
1:49:09
Speaker 2: really anticipated, and you don't have the tools. Your brain
1:49:13
Speaker 2: never learned how to deal with four dimensions versus three dimensions.
1:49:17
Speaker 2: Maybe it can do it over time, which I think
1:49:19
Speaker 2: to some degree is what happened to me, is that
1:49:21
Speaker 2: I did it so many times that my brain learned
1:49:23
Speaker 2: how to handle their environment, so it's no longer that
1:49:26
Speaker 2: confusing to me. I can kind of understand what's going on.
1:49:30
Speaker 2: But all of this is obviously postulation, but it does
1:49:32
Speaker 2: make sense from a neuroscientific perspective. Maybe one thing that
1:49:36
Speaker 2: is important to emphasize, when you're seeing something or experiencing something,
1:49:41
Speaker 2: it's not like just an information collecting device. The eyes
1:49:46
Speaker 2: are not working like a camera. It's not like the
1:49:49
Speaker 2: camera is there in some other form, but you kind of,
1:49:52
Speaker 2: you know, no, it's not how it works at all.
1:49:54
Speaker 2: What happens is the senses feed signals. the brain is
1:49:58
Speaker 2: guessing upwards. The brain is saying, with everything else that
1:50:02
Speaker 2: I know, it builds these like world models, right? Almost
1:50:04
Speaker 2: like think of it like an image, like a placard
1:50:07
Speaker 2: that just puts up. It's like, hey, I think it's this.
1:50:10
Speaker 2: And then the senses come in and it checks if
1:50:12
Speaker 2: the senses disagree with your assumption. If the senses don't disagree,
1:50:17
Speaker 2: so there's like full coherence or very high coherence, it's like, yep,
1:50:19
Speaker 2: it's exactly what you thought. Then the brain actually ignores
1:50:22
Speaker 2: the signal from the outside. It's actually projected from the inside.
1:50:27
Speaker 2: So right now, everything you're seeing that is regular, everything
1:50:29
Speaker 2: that's not moving that you're used to seeing, it's not
1:50:32
Speaker 2: photons that hit your retina. It's your brain guessing that
1:50:35
Speaker 2: this is what it is and your brain actually ignoring
1:50:38
Speaker 2: the photons coming from the outside because it doesn't need
1:50:40
Speaker 2: to do that. It already has the model. It's only
1:50:42
Speaker 2: when something surprising happens. If a bird flies into the
1:50:46
Speaker 2: room right now, it's like, you know, super surprising, then
1:50:49
Speaker 2: you'll be like, I didn't expect that. Your brain will
1:50:51
Speaker 2: start actually allowing more of what's coming from the outside
1:50:54
Speaker 2: in so it can get informed. Okay, whoa, whoa, it's
1:50:56
Speaker 2: not what I thought. Is it this? Is it this?
1:50:58
Speaker 2: And then it tries to guess adjacently, like, what is
1:51:01
Speaker 2: it close to what I thought it was? And eventually
1:51:03
Speaker 2: it will find it because it knows what the bird is.
1:51:06
Speaker 2: It's surprising, but not that surprising, right? But if a
1:51:09
Speaker 2: leprechaun just, like, hit a pops right here, it will
1:51:13
Speaker 2: take your brain a moment to kind of go, like,
1:51:14
Speaker 2: you know, what? Like, there's going to be a lot
1:51:17
Speaker 2: more that would need to happen. Now imagine if the
1:51:20
Speaker 2: leprechaun is made out of new dimensions that you've never
1:51:23
Speaker 2: seen before. Let's say it really is. Well, your brain...
1:51:26
Speaker 2: doesn't have, in the repertoire that it built, in the
1:51:31
Speaker 2: library of kind of things that it expects to see,
1:51:35
Speaker 2: it doesn't have that image. It has to construct it
1:51:38
Speaker 2: in real time. And that's a very patchy kind of,
1:51:41
Speaker 2: it looks like a ransom note. Like it doesn't really
1:51:43
Speaker 2: know how to do that. So it needs to almost
1:51:45
Speaker 2: like experience it a few times and then say, okay, okay,
1:51:47
Speaker 2: let's put something, it'll create a new world model. And
1:51:50
Speaker 2: the reason that this is relevant is because when you
1:51:52
Speaker 2: smoke DMT, the content isn't just nonsense and craziness and,
1:51:58
Speaker 2: you know, like just complete mayhem.
1:52:01
Speaker 1: No, no.
1:52:02
Speaker 2: It's super coherent. It's more coherent than this, but way
1:52:07
Speaker 2: more complex. So from everything I just described to you,
1:52:11
Speaker 2: from that perspective, it's very difficult to explain this because
1:52:14
Speaker 2: the brain is not in the business of making up
1:52:16
Speaker 2: new complex content on the fly. It's not what it does.
1:52:19
Speaker 2: Where is it coming from? Why is it so coherent
1:52:22
Speaker 2: and so realistic? That is the of central questions that
1:52:26
Speaker 2: scientists asking themselves. So from that perspective, it's a pretty
1:52:32
Speaker 2: good ground to stand on to assume that actually that
1:52:35
Speaker 2: content is real.
1:52:42
Speaker 1: Let's talk about these entities. Can we talk about those now?
1:52:45
Speaker 1: Of course. So we talked about angelic, demonic, reptilian, and
1:52:51
Speaker 1: two others.
1:52:53
Speaker 2: Insectoids. and Jokers that I mentioned, I think, yeah.
1:52:57
Speaker 1: What are these?
1:52:59
Speaker 2: So from what I saw, and again, I'm going to
1:53:02
Speaker 2: speak freely, but please understand that I don't expect people
1:53:05
Speaker 2: just going to take my word for it, of course,
1:53:06
Speaker 2: but I'm just speaking from my experience. So far, from
1:53:09
Speaker 2: what I understand, it's not the source. So the source
1:53:12
Speaker 2: would be kind of like way, way, way, way above that.
1:53:15
Speaker 2: And then it kind of disseminates these tasks of rendering
1:53:20
Speaker 2: these worlds to.
1:53:23
Speaker 2: Contractors let's call it and these species they all kind
1:53:27
Speaker 2: of produce their own function they're working towards the greater
1:53:30
Speaker 2: good of all from what i saw uh the the
1:53:36
Speaker 2: beings that are rendering our physical universe so what is
1:53:39
Speaker 2: simulated is not earth it's the universe it's the whole
1:53:42
Speaker 2: universe uh are the insectoids so the insectoids are the
1:53:46
Speaker 2: the ones that are actually rendering our world which is
1:53:49
Speaker 2: also why they are so common in people's perception. People
1:53:53
Speaker 2: very often see the insectoids.
1:53:54
Speaker 1: What do they look like?
1:53:56
Speaker 2: A lot of different kinds. Some of them look straight
1:53:58
Speaker 2: up like praying mantises. Some of them look like centipedes.
1:54:01
Speaker 2: Some of them look like spiders. They're enormous. Some people
1:54:05
Speaker 2: report they're the size of a planet. They're enormous. And
1:54:08
Speaker 2: I think it seems like they're weaving physical reality. And
1:54:12
Speaker 2: they are responsible for the fidelity of like, so the
1:54:15
Speaker 2: universe doesn't kind of fall apart. So like the, obviously
1:54:17
Speaker 2: it's automated, but also they kind of do the error
1:54:19
Speaker 2: correction when it needs to happen. And again, this is
1:54:22
Speaker 2: already like a super wild thought. So, you know, but
1:54:25
Speaker 2: in for a penny, in for a pound. So we'll
1:54:27
Speaker 2: keep compounding the craziness. It might be, it makes sense
1:54:31
Speaker 2: to me that they would be dark matter. So like
1:54:35
Speaker 2: the galaxy might be their city. So they're kind of
1:54:38
Speaker 2: like the behind the scenes is what dark matter is.
1:54:40
Speaker 2: It's a mass that they're, that's the layer that they're at,
1:54:44
Speaker 2: but it's their way of cloaking themselves from us. So
1:54:47
Speaker 2: they can literally just, they see us like you see
1:54:51
Speaker 2: me and they can pull any part of the universe
1:54:53
Speaker 2: to themselves, almost like on a, you know, just to
1:54:56
Speaker 2: just order it, just like you move your hand towards you.
1:54:59
Speaker 2: They can just kind of move any part of any
1:55:01
Speaker 2: time and any space. They can just move it towards
1:55:03
Speaker 2: them and look at it. They can just be aware
1:55:05
Speaker 2: of it basically. And they basically weave the physical universe.
1:55:10
Speaker 2: That's the insectoids. they're very neutral, which a lot of
1:55:16
Speaker 2: people are disturbed by because I think very often people
1:55:18
Speaker 2: are expecting to feel something benevolent and caring and loving,
1:55:23
Speaker 2: but they're not. But they're not evil. They just don't
1:55:27
Speaker 2: care in the same way that we think of caring, right?
1:55:29
Speaker 2: They just kind of do the physical thing. So very
1:55:32
Speaker 2: often this expectation that people have of this caring thing
1:55:35
Speaker 2: and the distance between that and the fact that they're
1:55:38
Speaker 2: just very neutral feels almost like a negative. It's almost
1:55:40
Speaker 2: like picking up an empty milk carton, you know, it's like, ah,
1:55:44
Speaker 2: like you wanted it to be full, but, and it
1:55:46
Speaker 2: kind of feels like that. Um, I mean, I can
1:55:50
Speaker 2: say more, but I feel like, you know, it's just,
1:55:53
Speaker 2: there's so many kind of small details that details there
1:55:55
Speaker 2: that I feel like won't really mean much to people. Um, there's, uh,
1:56:00
Speaker 2: the jokers are interesting because they seem to be extremely powerful.
1:56:05
Speaker 2: So like, they seem to be one of the most
1:56:06
Speaker 2: powerful beings in existence outside of the source, of course.
1:56:10
Speaker 2: And basically they seem to be kind of playing between
1:56:12
Speaker 2: the layers. So they don't really belong to any particular
1:56:14
Speaker 2: layer of existence. They can jump from the lowest to
1:56:17
Speaker 2: the highest in a split of a second. And there's
1:56:20
Speaker 2: something about them that basically encapsulates both the yin and
1:56:23
Speaker 2: the yang at the same time. So they're both the
1:56:26
Speaker 2: dark and the light all at once. Because in order
1:56:29
Speaker 2: for the creator, so like in order for God Almighty
1:56:33
Speaker 2: to experience something, it has to be through a boundary.
1:56:38
Speaker 2: But because the source is not a boundary, it's just
1:56:40
Speaker 2: the collective totality of all things, it needs kind of
1:56:44
Speaker 2: like the senses of experiencing it. So somebody somewhere in
1:56:48
Speaker 2: existence has to be able to experience the totality of
1:56:52
Speaker 2: both the dark and the light at the same time.
1:56:55
Speaker 2: And it seems that they are the ones that were
1:56:56
Speaker 2: chosen to do that. The gift that they were given
1:56:59
Speaker 2: as a reciprocation for that work, which is very difficult
1:57:03
Speaker 2: because it's almost like they don't know what they are
1:57:04
Speaker 2: in every given moment, is the fact that they're one
1:57:08
Speaker 2: of the most powerful beings. They can just do anything.
1:57:10
Speaker 2: They can just move faster than anything, get anywhere they want.
1:57:13
Speaker 2: They can literally do anything.
1:57:18
Speaker 1: I love grilling in the summer, but once you move
1:57:20
Speaker 1: past burgers and steaks, it gets frustrating fast. Vegetables fall
1:57:25
Speaker 1: through the grates, fish falls apart, food sticks, and cleanup
1:57:28
Speaker 1: takes forever. That's why I've been using Hexclad's barbecue collection.
1:57:33
Speaker 1: Hexclad took the hybrid technology they're known for and built
1:57:36
Speaker 1: it for the grill. Their barbecue grill pan gives you
1:57:39
Speaker 1: stainless steel searing power, cast iron durability, and nonstick convenience
1:57:45
Speaker 1: in one pan. The perforated design lets heat and smoke
1:57:48
Speaker 1: flow through, so vegetables, seafood, fish, and kebabs still get
1:57:54
Speaker 1: that grill flavor without falling apart or disappearing through the grates.
1:57:58
Speaker 1: They've also got the barbecue grill topper. which gives you
1:58:02
Speaker 1: more control with delicate foods or multiple portions at once.
1:58:06
Speaker 1: And cleanup is easy. It's dishwasher safe. Easy to wipe. down,
1:58:10
Speaker 1: heat safe up to 900 degrees, and the Terabond ceramic
1:58:15
Speaker 1: non-stick coating is free from forever chemicals. With over 1
1:58:20
Speaker 1: million customers and more than 50,000 five-star reviews, people clearly
1:58:25
Speaker 1: love cooking with Hexglad. So if you're planning on spending
1:58:28
Speaker 1: time behind the grill this summer, don't make it harder
1:58:31
Speaker 1: than it needs to be. Stop losing food through the grates,
1:58:35
Speaker 1: stop fighting cleanup, and upgrade your backyard cooking setup with
1:58:39
Speaker 1: Hexclad's Barbecue Collection. For a limited time only, our listeners
1:58:43
Speaker 1: get 10% off your order with our exclusive link. Just
1:58:47
Speaker 1: head to hexclad.com slash SRS. Support our show and check
1:58:52
Speaker 1: them out at H-E-X-C-L-A-D dot com forward slash S-R-S. Make
1:58:59
Speaker 1: sure you let them know we sent you.
1:59:03
Speaker 2: So this is also very often when people see them,
1:59:05
Speaker 2: it feels very jarring because they're... They're a lot. They're,
1:59:10
Speaker 2: you know.
1:59:10
Speaker 1: What do they look like?
1:59:14
Speaker 2: The reason they're called the Jokers is because they're... I
1:59:17
Speaker 2: think I've once seen them kind of like one of
1:59:20
Speaker 2: them making itself into a shape, but it's more the
1:59:23
Speaker 2: vibe they exert. It's almost like the feeling of their
1:59:26
Speaker 2: presence more than anything.
1:59:27
Speaker 1: Yeah.
1:59:28
Speaker 2: But you would equate it to like a, almost like a,
1:59:31
Speaker 2: and I'm gonna use a word that is gonna brand
1:59:34
Speaker 2: them as negative. They're not, they're literally both. They're also
1:59:38
Speaker 2: benevolent at the same time, but it feels like a deranged,
1:59:44
Speaker 2: like a very manic, what would you call them, like
1:59:51
Speaker 2: a freak show thing in a carnival, right? And that's,
1:59:55
Speaker 2: by the way, one of the archetypes that DMT is
1:59:56
Speaker 2: compared to is like the multi-dimensional carnival, basically, like a
2:00:01
Speaker 2: circus of some sort. But I've also caught them in
2:00:06
Speaker 2: quite a few moments where they do a really good
2:00:08
Speaker 2: thing or they really care. So like they're really undecipherable,
2:00:14
Speaker 2: And that seems to be by design. They're undecipherable to themselves.
2:00:18
Speaker 2: They don't really know. They just experience this dichotomy all
2:00:21
Speaker 2: at once, basically. And there's all kinds of other... By
2:00:27
Speaker 2: the way, I've definitely seen the reptilians quite a bit.
2:00:33
Speaker 2: The real ones, they don't seem to have any relationship
2:00:36
Speaker 2: to the conspiracy theory idea of the reptilians, of the
2:00:40
Speaker 2: evil ones that are conspiring and doing all the They
2:00:42
Speaker 2: don't seem to be that at all. Like they're just,
2:00:44
Speaker 2: you know, they kind of do their thing. And they're actually,
2:00:47
Speaker 2: they seem to be the custodians of, what would you
2:00:52
Speaker 2: call it? Well, I guess wisdom and knowledge. Like that's
2:00:55
Speaker 2: kind of like their domain. Like understanding what things are,
2:00:58
Speaker 2: how they work. They're kind of like, that seems to
2:01:00
Speaker 2: be more of their domain.
2:01:03
Speaker 1: Are you interacting with these?
2:01:05
Speaker 2: With the insectoids a lot, yeah. Yeah, I see them
2:01:07
Speaker 2: every time I go.
2:01:08
Speaker 1: What kind of interactions?
2:01:10
Speaker 2: For the most part, I just kind of see them. Um,
2:01:13
Speaker 2: sometimes it would stop and look at me and try
2:01:15
Speaker 2: to like do something or say something. Uh, I I've
2:01:18
Speaker 2: identified a signal from what I guess you would call
2:01:20
Speaker 2: the government. So like, I know when an official statement
2:01:23
Speaker 2: is made versus just somebody told you something, it feels different.
2:01:27
Speaker 2: Like you got an official email by, you know, someone. And, uh,
2:01:31
Speaker 2: so that that's always interesting. Cause then I kind of
2:01:32
Speaker 2: rely on the signal to tell me what is more
2:01:35
Speaker 2: or less likely I was. projected a few times to,
2:01:40
Speaker 2: I guess, what you would call the heavenly realms. And
2:01:43
Speaker 2: obviously everything you would imagine it to be just like
2:01:45
Speaker 2: super pleasant, very welcoming, but there's still a gravity to
2:01:49
Speaker 2: the situation. It's very interesting. Like even when you, in
2:01:52
Speaker 2: the heavenly realms, you understand the kind of the what's
2:01:56
Speaker 2: at stake. Like you kind of feel the, you know,
2:02:00
Speaker 2: there's not like in that sense, it's not a game,
2:02:02
Speaker 2: you know what I mean? But you can feel the,
2:02:06
Speaker 2: you know, the caricature version of what you would expect
2:02:08
Speaker 2: kind of like heavenly realms to be, which is kind
2:02:10
Speaker 2: of like this very welcoming light, a lot of like
2:02:14
Speaker 2: deep wisdom, you know, and the implication of whatever that is,
2:02:18
Speaker 2: like the ultimate, the God almighty, basically, which is just,
2:02:23
Speaker 2: you know, the scale of that is just so unfathomable.
2:02:25
Speaker 2: It really is like words are, sound so empty when
2:02:29
Speaker 2: you say it, when you're in the presence of that,
2:02:31
Speaker 2: and I'm sure some people experience this, it's just, you're like, whoa,
2:02:36
Speaker 2: really whoa like oh my like yeah you you tear
2:02:42
Speaker 2: up and you're like that's i can totally understand how
2:02:45
Speaker 2: if somebody lives in the presence of that all the
2:02:46
Speaker 2: time it's like it plays a big role in how
2:02:49
Speaker 2: profoundly you feel about life.
2:02:55
Speaker 1: Let's talk about this intravenous dmt would did you come
2:03:01
Speaker 1: up with that no came up.
2:03:03
Speaker 2: With that no no no no there's uh So actually, Dr.
2:03:08
Speaker 2: Rick Strassman did these experiments in the 90s. But if
2:03:12
Speaker 2: I'm not mistaken, those were not sustained states. Those were
2:03:15
Speaker 2: what's called push. So like I connect you to an
2:03:18
Speaker 2: intravenous thing, but mostly I'm just kind of like shooting
2:03:20
Speaker 2: you with a bunch of it, right? And Dr. Andrew
2:03:24
Speaker 2: Gallimore worked actually with Dr. Rick Strassman. And he basically
2:03:29
Speaker 2: realized that you can use the same technology we use
2:03:32
Speaker 2: in anesthesia. to sustain DMT in the blood. Because it's
2:03:35
Speaker 2: actually not that simple as people think. You actually have
2:03:38
Speaker 2: to figure out a lot because the brain chemistry changes,
2:03:40
Speaker 2: there's metabolism happening, certain substances metabolize faster than others. You
2:03:45
Speaker 2: have to really think about all of these parameters at once.
2:03:48
Speaker 2: And there's equations that describe the exact amount that you
2:03:51
Speaker 2: have to inject in the beginning, after five minutes, after
2:03:55
Speaker 2: 15 minutes, it changes. So he realized you can use
2:04:00
Speaker 2: probably the same technology to do the same with DMT.
2:04:03
Speaker 2: And that's basically how we have what we have today.
2:04:07
Speaker 2: And there's quite a few known researchers doing this.
2:04:10
Speaker 1: Dr.
2:04:10
Speaker 2: Chris Timmerman in the Imperial College in London, Dr. John
2:04:13
Speaker 2: Dean in San Diego, UC San Diego. I think there's
2:04:17
Speaker 2: a few others, but basically, yeah, Dr. Andrew Gallimore is
2:04:20
Speaker 2: the one that kind of dialed it in. And then
2:04:22
Speaker 2: people use this technology to do it. We use Kevin
2:04:26
Speaker 2: and Haley in Colorado. They're incredible researchers. Kevin is the chemist,
2:04:31
Speaker 2: Haley is the nurse. They're also a couple and they
2:04:33
Speaker 2: create this like beautiful thing for you. There's also another
2:04:36
Speaker 2: possibility for people. They can go to Eleusis, which is Dr.
2:04:42
Speaker 2: Andrew Gallimore is involved with that. It's in St. Vincent's.
2:04:46
Speaker 2: It's in these islands. It's really beautiful. It's like you're
2:04:50
Speaker 2: in paradise. It's a more expensive experience, but It's worth it.
2:04:55
Speaker 2: So like, if you can afford it, it's definitely worth
2:04:57
Speaker 2: it because you're surrounded by professionals. You have a doctor there.
2:05:00
Speaker 2: You have, you know, they create a really beautiful environment
2:05:03
Speaker 2: for you. And you do it across multiple days. So
2:05:06
Speaker 2: you show up and it's like a whole retreat where
2:05:08
Speaker 2: every day you go and you do a session and they,
2:05:11
Speaker 2: you know, they do a questionnaire for you. They make
2:05:13
Speaker 2: sure that there's integration. So there's a lot of options
2:05:16
Speaker 2: on the table today. Oh, and it's completely legal, by
2:05:18
Speaker 2: the way, for anybody who's like worried about legalities. So
2:05:21
Speaker 2: like they have a license, an agreement with the government
2:05:24
Speaker 2: of the island. to do this completely legal. So it's
2:05:27
Speaker 2: not illegal there, right? And they're planning to extend that
2:05:30
Speaker 2: to do more things. So if anybody is worried about
2:05:33
Speaker 2: the legal question, that's definitely your address. In Colorado, it's decriminalized.
2:05:38
Speaker 2: So it's not a criminal offense, but it's not legal federally. So,
2:05:42
Speaker 2: you know, depending where you kind of, but yeah, it's
2:05:44
Speaker 2: a very beautiful experience.
2:05:46
Speaker 1: You, as I.
2:05:47
Speaker 2: Told you before we started shooting, it's to some degree,
2:05:51
Speaker 2: it can be easier than smoking it because you're, You
2:05:54
Speaker 2: can dial it down or up as much as you want,
2:05:56
Speaker 2: and you can communicate in real time. And if you want,
2:05:59
Speaker 2: they'll give you a bolus, and you'll go, and if
2:06:02
Speaker 2: you want, they'll keep you there indefinitely. But you can
2:06:05
Speaker 2: do this for hours, basically. That's what Chase saw me
2:06:08
Speaker 2: do it, and it was like, I got to do it,
2:06:09
Speaker 2: and he did it, and his experience was very blissful.
2:06:14
Speaker 2: And by the way, if you don't mind, I saw
2:06:15
Speaker 2: that you were saying that it's hard for you to
2:06:18
Speaker 2: trust the people. I think that's key. I think it's
2:06:21
Speaker 2: very important. But this is where kind of getting to
2:06:25
Speaker 2: know the people before really helps. I'm pretty sure you're
2:06:29
Speaker 2: a pretty good character judge. And when you talk to
2:06:31
Speaker 2: Kevin and Haley, you like know right away. They're like, oh,
2:06:33
Speaker 2: they're like, they're like.
2:06:38
Speaker 1: I've been off a couple of times. But let's talk
2:06:43
Speaker 1: about the actual experience. I mean, is it that much?
2:06:46
Speaker 1: I mean, how high did you go?
2:06:50
Speaker 2: I went pretty far. I spent five hours in there. So, uh,
2:06:53
Speaker 2: I think Chase did just slightly under that. Um, I
2:06:56
Speaker 2: went with 460, it ended up being 464 milligrams, which
2:07:00
Speaker 2: is an enormous amount. So, uh, but we weren't trying
2:07:03
Speaker 2: to like break records or anything. We were just testing,
2:07:06
Speaker 2: we were testing a bunch of things and we were
2:07:07
Speaker 2: shooting for the film. So there was a camera crew
2:07:10
Speaker 2: there and we were like, we just kept on going basically.
2:07:13
Speaker 2: And that's actually one of the times where I experienced
2:07:15
Speaker 2: the heavenly realms. Like I was brought up to this,
2:07:17
Speaker 2: you know, incredible field of light and I was welcomed
2:07:20
Speaker 2: and all of that stuff. And then they were talking
2:07:23
Speaker 2: about that whole experience for me was around the whole,
2:07:29
Speaker 2: the importance of the moral question, ethics, what true morality is,
2:07:33
Speaker 2: how it influences not just us, but the general, like
2:07:36
Speaker 2: the rest of the field and things like this. It
2:07:38
Speaker 2: was very beautiful. But again, with the whole kind of
2:07:41
Speaker 2: like the gravity of the situation. So, But that was
2:07:44
Speaker 2: the majority of my experience. But we were also very
2:07:47
Speaker 2: busy doing other things, like looking at the laser and
2:07:49
Speaker 2: doing all kinds of tests. So it was a mixed
2:07:53
Speaker 2: bag in that regard. I really liked the space. So
2:07:57
Speaker 2: for me, I can probably stay there pretty much indefinitely
2:07:59
Speaker 2: if you like. take care of my body. I can
2:08:01
Speaker 2: stay there. But it's not that way for everybody. So
2:08:05
Speaker 2: everybody has to ask themselves how comfortable they are with
2:08:08
Speaker 2: novelty because it's dialed up to 100 basically.
2:08:12
Speaker 1: Interesting. Interesting. And how long were you in the heaven
2:08:16
Speaker 1: when you were home? Do you know?
2:08:18
Speaker 2: The majority of it probably like until somebody pulled my
2:08:21
Speaker 2: attention towards the test we were doing.
2:08:22
Speaker 1: Are you completely out?
2:08:24
Speaker 2: No, I was aware of the room.
2:08:25
Speaker 1: You're coherent.
2:08:26
Speaker 2: You can be. Absolutely, it can happen, of course. Yeah,
2:08:29
Speaker 2: if you're fully out, you're fully out.
2:08:31
Speaker 1: It can happen.
2:08:33
Speaker 2: And also, maybe an important thing to mention, darker experiences
2:08:38
Speaker 2: can happen as well. Now, obviously, if you do everything correctly,
2:08:41
Speaker 2: so if you set in setting, you set up the space,
2:08:44
Speaker 2: it actually plays a role. It's not just to make
2:08:46
Speaker 2: you feel good. There's certain rules, right? and if you
2:08:49
Speaker 2: kind of abide by these rules, the chances of having
2:08:52
Speaker 2: a dark experience are very low, but it can happen.
2:08:55
Speaker 2: And then, you know, just you can always ask to
2:08:58
Speaker 2: like lower it or you can just have an interaction
2:09:01
Speaker 2: because in the end of the day, either people believe
2:09:04
Speaker 2: it or not, everything, including the darkest of entities, they're
2:09:08
Speaker 2: all the children of God. They're all encapsulated within the
2:09:13
Speaker 2: blanket where God still always keeps some door open for
2:09:18
Speaker 2: them to some degree. So in that regard, they're not
2:09:21
Speaker 2: different than us. So they're, you know, they have, you
2:09:24
Speaker 2: have to, if you're interested, you can kind of, if
2:09:26
Speaker 2: you're already there, that happens. It might be interesting to
2:09:28
Speaker 2: actually have an interaction. It doesn't mean that you're playing ball.
2:09:32
Speaker 2: It's just to observe and set up your own boundary.
2:09:34
Speaker 2: And that can also be an interesting exploration, which, by
2:09:37
Speaker 2: the way, a lot of people use for kind of
2:09:40
Speaker 2: dealing with their own demons. Because very often we have
2:09:43
Speaker 2: stuff inside of us that we don't admit. but that
2:09:46
Speaker 2: can actually be a reflection of that. It might be
2:09:48
Speaker 2: showing you something that you might need to address. But
2:09:51
Speaker 2: I'm only mentioning it because we have to be responsible.
2:09:54
Speaker 2: We have to acknowledge the fact that, yeah, darker experiences
2:09:56
Speaker 2: happen as well, for sure.
2:10:01
Speaker 1: Do you think we should be messing around with these realms?
2:10:04
Speaker 1: Do you think this is one realm, or are you
2:10:07
Speaker 1: witnessing several realms?
2:10:08
Speaker 2: It's the infinite space. You're asking a good question, but
2:10:13
Speaker 2: I think it's just the same question of should we
2:10:15
Speaker 2: be messing around with anything. The gene that we carry
2:10:23
Speaker 2: that tells us don't venture out of the village is
2:10:26
Speaker 2: to some degree a good one because you want to
2:10:30
Speaker 2: stay where it's safer. But if you will never venture
2:10:33
Speaker 2: out of the village, you'll never discover anything new and
2:10:36
Speaker 2: you will never better the world. And wolves will still
2:10:39
Speaker 2: come to the village. There's no plateau where danger is
2:10:42
Speaker 2: gone completely. It's like by going out of the village,
2:10:45
Speaker 2: by venturing out, you are endangering yourself to some degree,
2:10:48
Speaker 2: but you're also discovering things that can actually feed the village,
2:10:52
Speaker 2: that can actually make things better. And I think that's
2:10:54
Speaker 2: what humans are. They are the kind of thing that
2:10:57
Speaker 2: allows the world to become a better version of itself
2:11:01
Speaker 2: if we choose to be that kind of a thing
2:11:03
Speaker 2: and play that role. If we choose to be something
2:11:06
Speaker 2: else and just be selfish, then it won't be that.
2:11:08
Speaker 2: But I do think that This fear is to some
2:11:11
Speaker 2: degree merited because, you know, you never know what you're
2:11:14
Speaker 2: messing up. But the reality of it is that you
2:11:16
Speaker 2: kind of only go by what you're experiencing in real time.
2:11:20
Speaker 2: So when you go and experience the darker entities, you
2:11:22
Speaker 2: go like, oh my God, you know, maybe I didn't
2:11:25
Speaker 2: want to experience that. But when you experience the really
2:11:27
Speaker 2: positive ones, you're really happy.
2:11:29
Speaker 1: You did that.
2:11:30
Speaker 2: So maybe you say, well, maybe then because both extremes exist,
2:11:34
Speaker 2: maybe we should just stay where we are. Legitimate attitude,
2:11:38
Speaker 2: that's fine. But I think when people can explore, I
2:11:42
Speaker 2: think it's in our nature. I think we're the kind
2:11:45
Speaker 2: of thing that wants to explore, that wants to go out.
2:11:47
Speaker 2: It's just what we do, right? So I think that's
2:11:51
Speaker 2: not really a question of should we. That's how we are.
2:11:56
Speaker 2: And to some degree, I think there's, again, healthy respect
2:12:02
Speaker 2: and the ability to be humble at the same time
2:12:05
Speaker 2: and correct course if needed. Very important. But You can't
2:12:10
Speaker 2: stop a dog from sniffing. That's what we do. The
2:12:16
Speaker 2: fact that it's available, think about this.
2:12:18
Speaker 1: Oh, okay.
2:12:20
Speaker 2: Well, I guess what I was about to say is
2:12:23
Speaker 2: that the fact that it's possible to do tells you
2:12:27
Speaker 2: that there's something there, but I immediately thought of a
2:12:30
Speaker 2: fair criticism of this point, which is like, well, maybe
2:12:32
Speaker 2: it was left by the devil or something because they
2:12:34
Speaker 2: were trying to catch you or something. Yeah, but that
2:12:37
Speaker 2: would be very hard to explain why there's so many
2:12:39
Speaker 2: beautiful things in there as well that definitely doesn't belong
2:12:42
Speaker 2: to that category of things. It feels more like it's
2:12:43
Speaker 2: just the main artery or more of, and we get
2:12:47
Speaker 2: to kind of interact with it. With the full admission,
2:12:50
Speaker 2: this is not for everybody. I don't think, just like
2:12:53
Speaker 2: everything else, skydiving is not for everybody, going to space
2:12:56
Speaker 2: is not for everybody, but it is for some people.
2:12:59
Speaker 2: And those are not competitions. Like if you look, if
2:13:03
Speaker 2: you ask the more kind of, big question about humans
2:13:07
Speaker 2: in general people think that you know going to mars
2:13:09
Speaker 2: is somehow uh uh somehow negating fixing global warming or
2:13:16
Speaker 2: like that's nothing to do with it like some people
2:13:19
Speaker 2: will do this no matter what like because that's who
2:13:22
Speaker 2: they are they want to go explore they're they're pioneers
2:13:24
Speaker 2: right some people they love here they love dirt they
2:13:28
Speaker 2: love gardening the beautiful those are not mutually exclusive you
2:13:32
Speaker 2: need someone to take care of home and you need
2:13:34
Speaker 2: someone to go and venture out of the village to
2:13:36
Speaker 2: find new things that you can bring back and hopefully
2:13:40
Speaker 2: can feed the village as well with new beautiful things.
2:13:42
Speaker 2: What we will discover by trying, even if we never
2:13:45
Speaker 2: get there, I think we will, but even if we
2:13:47
Speaker 2: never will, just by trying to do this, we will
2:13:49
Speaker 2: learn so much that can probably help us solve global warming.
2:13:53
Speaker 2: It's always reciprocal. If people just understand that we're not
2:13:56
Speaker 2: all the same. Some people, they want to see the
2:13:59
Speaker 2: new thing, they wanted the future, and some people They
2:14:03
Speaker 2: just want to stay put. They just want to take
2:14:04
Speaker 2: care of home. One thing I will say as somebody
2:14:07
Speaker 2: who definitely, one of the people that loves exploring, you know,
2:14:12
Speaker 2: home is an interesting word to use here because home
2:14:15
Speaker 2: is home. But if you're still at home at 43
2:14:19
Speaker 2: years old, something's kind of off, isn't it? Like your
2:14:23
Speaker 2: mom's going to start looking at you like, what's going
2:14:25
Speaker 2: on here? You know what I mean? It's like, I
2:14:28
Speaker 2: think it's time to go and explore. So, Home is great,
2:14:31
Speaker 2: and it's always going to be here, but we're becoming
2:14:35
Speaker 2: young adults as a species, so I think it's actually
2:14:37
Speaker 2: ripe for let's go and find out what we want
2:14:40
Speaker 2: to be in the universe. And hopefully we can become
2:14:43
Speaker 2: the kind of species that we're proud to be. And
2:14:45
Speaker 2: I think that's very possible.
2:14:47
Speaker 1: Let's talk about consciousness for a little bit. What does
2:14:50
Speaker 1: it mean to you?
2:14:52
Speaker 2: Consciousness for me is a very simple thing, which is
2:14:54
Speaker 2: just the fact of experience itself. So just the fact
2:14:57
Speaker 2: that anything is happening at all. How it comes about
2:15:00
Speaker 2: is a separate question, but if you ask me what
2:15:02
Speaker 2: consciousness is, it's just the fact that anything is happening
2:15:05
Speaker 2: right now. It's the only thing you know for sure. Consciousness,
2:15:08
Speaker 2: you know, sometimes people say, can consciousness be an illusion?
2:15:12
Speaker 1: No.
2:15:13
Speaker 2: It's the one thing that can't possibly be an illusion.
2:15:16
Speaker 2: Because if you're asking the question, I just released a
2:15:18
Speaker 2: short clip of this recently. If you're asking the question,
2:15:22
Speaker 2: is it actually what you're experiencing or just seems to
2:15:27
Speaker 2: be that way? The seeming itself, the fact that it
2:15:31
Speaker 2: seems like anything, is what consciousness is. We're not asking
2:15:35
Speaker 2: how it came about. It's just the fact that it's happening.
2:15:37
Speaker 2: That's what consciousness is. So it cannot possibly be an illusion.
2:15:40
Speaker 2: It's the one thing you can take to the bank
2:15:43
Speaker 2: that for sure consciousness is the only thing you know
2:15:45
Speaker 2: that is actually happening. Everything else can be an illusion.
2:15:48
Speaker 2: Your ideas about the universe, like whatever it is. That
2:15:51
Speaker 2: can't be because you have it. This is it. That's
2:15:53
Speaker 2: what it is. And then begs the question whether consciousness
2:15:57
Speaker 2: is fundamental, which to me seems to be very obvious.
2:16:01
Speaker 2: Of course, it has to be fundamental. It is the
2:16:04
Speaker 2: most fundamental thing. And then everything else probably arises from
2:16:07
Speaker 2: it to some degree. But not all consciousness is what
2:16:12
Speaker 2: we experience. There's all kinds of levels and types of consciousnesses.
2:16:17
Speaker 2: We are a very particular agent-like consciousness, which is kind
2:16:21
Speaker 2: of like this inwards pointing thing where you believe yourself
2:16:25
Speaker 2: to be behind your eyes, between your ears, and the
2:16:27
Speaker 2: rest is happening out there. But even from meditative states,
2:16:31
Speaker 2: I can tell you that you can have experiences that
2:16:34
Speaker 2: are not embodied. Like you can just be diffused cloud. Well,
2:16:37
Speaker 2: you did a five-day meal, so you know. You can
2:16:39
Speaker 2: just be a diffused cloud of consciousness. And that's probably
2:16:42
Speaker 2: how most consciousness is.
2:16:44
Speaker 1: Where does it come from?
2:16:45
Speaker 2: I think it's literally the world itself. It's a question
2:16:49
Speaker 2: of where the world comes from, which, what?
2:16:51
Speaker 1: Do you think we're a shared consciousness?
2:16:53
Speaker 2: I think we have a shared pool of that consciousness
2:16:56
Speaker 2: that we can enter, but then the agency is also
2:17:00
Speaker 2: arising from it. The separation also means something. For this
2:17:05
Speaker 2: level of emergence, the separation is necessary to do something,
2:17:08
Speaker 2: and then we can enter a state in which literally
2:17:11
Speaker 2: you and me are the same.
2:17:14
Speaker 1: Can I read some more that you think that there
2:17:16
Speaker 1: are levels of consciousness? Could you go through that? Yeah.
2:17:24
Speaker 2: So I guess it will be all the way to
2:17:26
Speaker 2: the unified field or God or like just the totality
2:17:29
Speaker 2: of everything that can be. And I guess that's what, well,
2:17:34
Speaker 2: if you look at it from a certain perspective, maybe
2:17:36
Speaker 2: this is why, this is what Buddhists refer to as nirvana,
2:17:40
Speaker 2: which is just the totality of just existence. Like there's
2:17:43
Speaker 2: no more, there's nothing that can be said about it.
2:17:46
Speaker 2: There's nothing can be done about it. It's not a thing.
2:17:49
Speaker 2: It's just the totality of all and the levels in
2:17:53
Speaker 2: between are basically level of agency like how how much
2:17:57
Speaker 2: your agent-like consciousness perceives itself to be so maybe your
2:18:02
Speaker 2: cells are conscious but they're not as conscious as you
2:18:06
Speaker 2: because the amount of information that you embody at the
2:18:10
Speaker 2: same time is way greater than what any one cell does.
2:18:14
Speaker 2: And I do feel like that's basically like these infinite
2:18:17
Speaker 2: nested dolls. So maybe earth is also conscious and like truly,
2:18:21
Speaker 2: but not just physical things. Like it kind of gets
2:18:23
Speaker 2: into this, it gets very esoteric, but this, you know,
2:18:28
Speaker 2: conference that I mentioned to you with Donald Hoffman and Dr.
2:18:31
Speaker 2: Andrew Gallimore, this kernel that they're talking about, it's actually
2:18:34
Speaker 2: a super interesting theory. And it really, to be honest,
2:18:37
Speaker 2: It was a very small closed event, but to me,
2:18:41
Speaker 2: it felt like something happened. It felt like an inflection
2:18:44
Speaker 2: point in history in that conference, like something huge happened,
2:18:48
Speaker 2: which is this understanding that they have. I think they
2:18:50
Speaker 2: unlocked something huge. So you'll be hearing a lot about this.
2:18:53
Speaker 2: And you should look up Donald Hoffman. He's actually trending,
2:18:55
Speaker 2: like he was on all the big ones. It might
2:18:58
Speaker 2: be a really interesting conversation for you. And basically what
2:19:03
Speaker 2: happened what they found is that there's this one component,
2:19:06
Speaker 2: which is what they call the kernel of experience, which
2:19:09
Speaker 2: is it defines if this is all the possible field
2:19:13
Speaker 2: of experiences you can have, what the kernel determines is
2:19:17
Speaker 2: how big is the pool from which you're sampling from.
2:19:20
Speaker 2: So what they think is happening is that the human
2:19:22
Speaker 2: experience is kind of like maybe here, right? DMT does this.
2:19:26
Speaker 2: It just kind of samples from a much larger pool
2:19:28
Speaker 2: of what's possible to experience. And then the experience might
2:19:31
Speaker 2: become not just more of, but it can become a
2:19:35
Speaker 2: completely different kind of thing. So all of a sudden,
2:19:41
Speaker 2: it's not something that is languageable. It's not Englishable. You
2:19:44
Speaker 2: can't really put words to it because those words don't exist.
2:19:48
Speaker 2: It's just a completely different reformulation. And this is why
2:19:51
Speaker 2: defining just the layers is very hard of consciousness, because
2:19:55
Speaker 2: it might not work like a hierarchy. It might work
2:19:59
Speaker 2: more like a different arrangements of which makes it way
2:20:03
Speaker 2: more complex.
2:20:05
Speaker 1: Hmm. What about the physical?
2:20:09
Speaker 2: That's a great question. That's why I ask myself all
2:20:11
Speaker 2: the time. If it's all mind, why this particular region
2:20:14
Speaker 2: of mind feels so regular, feels so like something like
2:20:18
Speaker 2: I can't really control, right? I don't really have a
2:20:21
Speaker 2: good answer for it yet, but I think that has
2:20:23
Speaker 2: something to do with fidelity of local structure. So like
2:20:28
Speaker 2: it's part of the training wheels. It's part of the
2:20:30
Speaker 2: kind of the grace of God. Because if you would
2:20:32
Speaker 2: just be, if anything would be anything, you wouldn't be
2:20:35
Speaker 2: able to exist. Like, you know, if you would just
2:20:37
Speaker 2: fall through the chair, through the floor, all of a
2:20:39
Speaker 2: sudden it'd be like, oh yeah, what's going on? Like
2:20:40
Speaker 2: you can't trust anything. I think the fidelity of this
2:20:43
Speaker 2: construct is actually one of the gifts that we were given.
2:20:47
Speaker 2: And if it's the training ground, then maybe, because if
2:20:51
Speaker 2: everything you would just think would become immediately, it would
2:20:55
Speaker 2: devolve into hell immediately. Like how many negative thoughts people
2:20:59
Speaker 2: have every day? Like enormous amounts, right? So maybe this
2:21:02
Speaker 2: is what it is. We're learning how to control our
2:21:04
Speaker 2: inner state. So there's this hiatus that gives us some grace.
2:21:09
Speaker 2: So we see if things go in the wrong direction
2:21:11
Speaker 2: and we can get to correct them. We're giving time
2:21:15
Speaker 2: to process how things unfold. So I think maybe what
2:21:18
Speaker 2: the physical world is, it's the stage that was created
2:21:23
Speaker 2: to help us learn to become more of what we're
2:21:27
Speaker 2: capable of being.
2:21:29
Speaker 1: You know, I've heard... Back to that Intervenous DMT experience.
2:21:35
Speaker 1: You know, I've had people tell me that you meet
2:21:40
Speaker 1: your guardian angels, that you meet... You figure out who
2:21:45
Speaker 1: you are. You can ask questions.
2:21:47
Speaker 2: On DMT?
2:21:51
Speaker 1: On DMT. The Intervenous one.
2:21:55
Speaker 2: Okay, so are you asking me if I'm experiencing this?
2:21:57
Speaker 1: I'm asking you. Um.
2:22:01
Speaker 2: I've never met my guardian angel. I've never met what
2:22:04
Speaker 2: people call the guides.
2:22:06
Speaker 1: The guides?
2:22:07
Speaker 2: Yeah, some people refer to them as the guides. When
2:22:10
Speaker 2: people wake up spiritually, very often they refer to the guides.
2:22:14
Speaker 2: They tell them what's the correct thing. I don't know.
2:22:18
Speaker 2: I've met people that are very spiritually awake. It definitely
2:22:23
Speaker 2: feels like something to be in their presence, so there's
2:22:26
Speaker 2: something different. I tend to believe them, but I don't
2:22:30
Speaker 2: have a way to know if that It's just like
2:22:32
Speaker 2: a psychological structure that was created in them, you know,
2:22:34
Speaker 2: like I've never experienced it. Is it possible?
2:22:36
Speaker 1: Yeah.
2:22:37
Speaker 2: It would make perfect sense that, you know, there will
2:22:39
Speaker 2: be kind of, because they're ready, they're kind of guided
2:22:43
Speaker 2: a little bit more than others to kind of help
2:22:44
Speaker 2: other humans and all that stuff.
2:22:46
Speaker 1: You kind of hear them say, you know, they figure
2:22:48
Speaker 1: out who they are. Yeah. What's, who am I? Like
2:22:51
Speaker 1: you hear that a lot in the, in the, in
2:22:54
Speaker 1: the psychedelic realm, right? Who am I? What's my purpose?
2:22:58
Speaker 2: So it's kind of hard to know who's faking it
2:22:59
Speaker 2: and who actually made it, right? Uh, but yeah, no, I,
2:23:02
Speaker 2: I think that refers more to the, the whole Buddhistic
2:23:05
Speaker 2: approach of, um, that ultimately you're not at the content,
2:23:10
Speaker 2: but it actually gets a little kind of fumbled by,
2:23:13
Speaker 2: by a lot of people that you mentioned, because there's
2:23:14
Speaker 2: this tendency to say, I've discovered I'm all of this.
2:23:18
Speaker 2: So like, I'm not just the little me with my psychology. I'm,
2:23:21
Speaker 2: I'm the totality of all things. I think to some
2:23:26
Speaker 2: degree it tries to echo what Buddhists say. But what
2:23:30
Speaker 2: Buddhists say is a little bit deeper than this. Buddhists
2:23:33
Speaker 2: don't say you're the totality of things. They're saying you're
2:23:36
Speaker 2: none of the things. You're the field in which all
2:23:39
Speaker 2: the things arise. So the referral is probably to that experience.
2:23:44
Speaker 2: That you basically discover that there's not like little me
2:23:47
Speaker 2: struggling in the machine. You're actually just the experience itself
2:23:51
Speaker 2: in which everything happens. There's actually a really fun practice
2:23:54
Speaker 2: that you can do anywhere. It's an old Buddhist practice
2:23:58
Speaker 2: that was illustrated really well in this book called On
2:24:01
Speaker 2: Having No Head. And basically, anybody can do this anywhere.
2:24:05
Speaker 2: If you look at an object, right, and you turn
2:24:08
Speaker 2: your attention back on yourself, and in that moment, you're
2:24:12
Speaker 2: asking the question, who is looking? But you're not asking
2:24:16
Speaker 2: the question because you're trying to find out. You're not
2:24:18
Speaker 2: trying to answer the question. You just... You exist.
2:24:23
Speaker 1: in the question.
2:24:24
Speaker 2: So like if you look at me right now, right?
2:24:25
Speaker 2: And it might not happen right away. You can practice
2:24:27
Speaker 2: a few times. But if you then turn the attention
2:24:30
Speaker 2: just inside back on yourself and ask who is looking,
2:24:34
Speaker 2: like who is actually, where is that thing that is
2:24:36
Speaker 2: actually looking out? And in the beginning, it would be
2:24:39
Speaker 2: like all these answers, which is like, what do you mean?
2:24:42
Speaker 2: Like me, like here behind my head, where I own
2:24:44
Speaker 2: is it? Well, the second you gave it an answer,
2:24:47
Speaker 2: you collapse the possibility of experiencing it. But if you
2:24:50
Speaker 2: allow yourself to not answer, just be in the field
2:24:52
Speaker 2: of that question, eventually something will happen. And it's a
2:24:56
Speaker 2: very quick thing, so you're not supposed to go deeper
2:24:58
Speaker 2: or something like this. Just, you reset, do it again. Reset,
2:25:02
Speaker 2: do it again. Eventually what will happen is, it will
2:25:05
Speaker 2: be almost like a glitch. You'll be like, you'll realize
2:25:09
Speaker 2: that that thing you think you're in the middle, it's
2:25:11
Speaker 2: not there. There's one line that in some Buddhist practices
2:25:16
Speaker 2: they repeat over and over and over again. And they
2:25:18
Speaker 2: repeated it until it becomes a reality. They say, there's
2:25:22
Speaker 2: no one here that all of this is happening to.
2:25:25
Speaker 2: And they keep repeating this. There's no one here that
2:25:29
Speaker 2: all of this is happening to. And eventually, from the statement,
2:25:33
Speaker 2: you get to the experience of that reality, which is actually,
2:25:37
Speaker 2: there's no one here that all of this is happening to.
2:25:39
Speaker 2: It's just kind of happening. And I've experienced this in
2:25:43
Speaker 2: meditative retreats, where it just becomes the room. What do
2:25:48
Speaker 2: you mean it just becomes the broken? There's no more
2:25:50
Speaker 2: agent in the middle. The body is there, but you
2:25:53
Speaker 2: don't feel like a you. You realize that the you
2:25:56
Speaker 2: was just a feeling, just like you feel elation, anger,
2:26:01
Speaker 2: all the emotions. It's just a sensation in the body,
2:26:05
Speaker 2: the thing that you feel yourself. It's a sensation in
2:26:08
Speaker 2: the body probably created for survival reasons. When you refer
2:26:12
Speaker 2: to things, because you need to get somewhere, I need
2:26:15
Speaker 2: to get there. I love whatever, I dislike whatever. When
2:26:21
Speaker 2: you're making these, you're referring to something, what you're implying
2:26:26
Speaker 2: is that there's a thing that is there away from what?
2:26:32
Speaker 2: Then what's implied is that it's away from something. This
2:26:36
Speaker 2: implication is what you feel like being a self. It's
2:26:41
Speaker 2: a feeling of being a you. like a central inness
2:26:45
Speaker 2: of some sort. But when you look close enough, you
2:26:47
Speaker 2: realize it's just all these like outwards pointing vectors. But
2:26:50
Speaker 2: if you look in the middle, there's nothing there. It
2:26:53
Speaker 2: was all implied by the references to the external world.
2:26:57
Speaker 2: But if you relax this machinery and you just stop
2:27:00
Speaker 2: trying to point, what happens is it just diffuses, just
2:27:04
Speaker 2: like in a 5MAO where you just kind of become
2:27:06
Speaker 2: the field. There's just a room. There's no psychedelic explosion,
2:27:10
Speaker 2: but there's literally just the room. And it's very peculiar,
2:27:13
Speaker 2: this feeling. this state, because it's not really outstanding. It's
2:27:18
Speaker 2: the most matter of fact you will ever experience. It's
2:27:20
Speaker 2: almost like, oh, that's just how things are. And the
2:27:24
Speaker 2: second you, you know, you get too deeply into the, oh,
2:27:27
Speaker 2: this is super interesting, then you're back self, because now
2:27:30
Speaker 2: you're referring to something. But that feeling is very liberating.
2:27:35
Speaker 2: And that's what ultimately liberation is, because then there's nothing
2:27:39
Speaker 2: to defend. There's nothing to worry about. There's no one
2:27:42
Speaker 2: here that all this is happening to. It's just kind
2:27:44
Speaker 2: of happening. But then that feeling, if you keep pushing it,
2:27:48
Speaker 2: you can expand to not associating with even the concept
2:27:52
Speaker 2: that brought you there, with the body, with everything, and ultimately,
2:27:55
Speaker 2: according to the Buddha, which is what full liberation is, nirvana,
2:27:59
Speaker 2: which is that you stop associating even with your own reincarnation. So, like,
2:28:03
Speaker 2: in the moment of death, you're so not attached that
2:28:09
Speaker 2: you simply no longer reincarnate. It's done. Like, there's nothing.
2:28:14
Speaker 2: But on a much lower level, you can absolutely have
2:28:17
Speaker 2: this experience just by this little practice that I just
2:28:19
Speaker 2: described to you. And it doesn't take years. Like, if
2:28:22
Speaker 2: you're actually consistent with it and you do this, like,
2:28:24
Speaker 2: you can do this, well, I wouldn't do it when
2:28:26
Speaker 2: you drive. But, like, you just sit on the couch
2:28:28
Speaker 2: for a second or something. Just do it with like anything.
2:28:31
Speaker 2: Just look at a camera. It's easier with natural objects,
2:28:34
Speaker 2: with a bush, whatever. Do it a few times. Within
2:28:37
Speaker 2: two or three days, I bet you'll be able to
2:28:39
Speaker 2: do it. And it will be very distinct. It wouldn't
2:28:42
Speaker 2: be one of those like, did I manage to do it?
2:28:44
Speaker 2: You'll be like, holy shit. Like you will feel that
2:28:46
Speaker 2: there's actually nothing there. And if it's really hard to
2:28:51
Speaker 2: grasp why this would be convincing, there's a little... kind
2:28:55
Speaker 2: of this allegory that Buddhists use to describe it. It's
2:28:57
Speaker 2: called the snake and the rope allegory. So basically, if
2:29:01
Speaker 2: we see like a snake, right? And the thing and
2:29:03
Speaker 2: be like, holy shit, you have an emotional response. And
2:29:06
Speaker 2: then it's not moving. So you and I will be like, wait,
2:29:09
Speaker 2: because it's still kind of far and it's dark. Oh,
2:29:11
Speaker 2: we think it's a rope. Then you relax, right? So
2:29:14
Speaker 2: you're going to keep moving between this like, is it
2:29:16
Speaker 2: a snake?
2:29:17
Speaker 1: Is it a rope?
2:29:17
Speaker 2: Is it a snake?
2:29:18
Speaker 1: Is it a rope?
2:29:19
Speaker 2: And so it's equated to this fact that there's no self.
2:29:23
Speaker 2: So you go between experiencing that there is no self
2:29:26
Speaker 2: back to being a self. But there's going to come
2:29:29
Speaker 2: a moment that if I muster the courage and I
2:29:32
Speaker 2: get up and I walk towards it and I get
2:29:34
Speaker 2: close enough, it's going to come a moment where the
2:29:37
Speaker 2: possibilities collapse. Because if it is a rope, and if
2:29:40
Speaker 2: I'm close enough and I'm holding it and there's enough information,
2:29:44
Speaker 2: that's it. I know it's a rope now. And even
2:29:46
Speaker 2: if I'm going to go back to my seat and
2:29:47
Speaker 2: leave it there, at no point am I going to
2:29:49
Speaker 2: all of a sudden believe it's a snake again, because
2:29:51
Speaker 2: I know it's a rope now. So there's a moment
2:29:53
Speaker 2: of conclusiveness that happens when I'm close enough. So the
2:29:57
Speaker 2: experience of having no self, you can have this conclusive
2:30:02
Speaker 2: experience with in such a way that you will never
2:30:04
Speaker 2: go back to believing there's a self again. And that's liberation.
2:30:07
Speaker 2: That's basically kind of like the ultimate point.
2:30:10
Speaker 1: So is this an ego death?
2:30:14
Speaker 2: Well, you can think of it like this, yeah.
2:30:16
Speaker 1: Is it the same as experiencing the oneness on five?
2:30:20
Speaker 2: I think the five is accompanied by a lot of
2:30:22
Speaker 2: other factors as well, like the presence of something divine
2:30:25
Speaker 2: in addition to that, which doesn't happen with just the
2:30:28
Speaker 2: collapsing of the self. But the collapsing of the self
2:30:31
Speaker 2: is very pleasant. It's pure harmony, just like how things are.
2:30:35
Speaker 2: There's no problems. Everything is perfect. Have you ever had,
2:30:39
Speaker 2: sometimes people have this haphazardly, but they just don't notice
2:30:42
Speaker 2: that that's basically what happened. Did you ever have like,
2:30:45
Speaker 2: you know, Out of nowhere, for no good reason, you
2:30:49
Speaker 2: just sit there and all of a sudden you're like, oh, dude,
2:30:51
Speaker 2: everything's great. Like just for a moment, there's like this
2:30:54
Speaker 2: like complete relief. For no reason. This happens quite often
2:30:57
Speaker 2: to people. And then they go back to worrying and
2:30:59
Speaker 2: all that stuff. But that moment, it's very close to that.
2:31:04
Speaker 2: And by the way, people lose themselves all the time.
2:31:06
Speaker 2: This is not my example, pointed out by many. But
2:31:09
Speaker 2: like when you watch a movie in a theater and
2:31:10
Speaker 2: you're fully engrossed in the film, like you're fully immersed.
2:31:14
Speaker 2: You don't remember you came to watch a movie. You
2:31:16
Speaker 2: don't remember you're there. You're just in the movie. Well,
2:31:19
Speaker 2: yourself was the fuse. But there's just a movie. See
2:31:23
Speaker 2: what I'm saying? And then when you snap out of it,
2:31:25
Speaker 2: you don't even notice the transition. But you eat popcorn.
2:31:28
Speaker 2: It's like, now I have a body. Oh, I'm in
2:31:30
Speaker 2: a theater. But you don't think about it. And you
2:31:32
Speaker 2: go back to the movie. But imagine that with reality,
2:31:35
Speaker 2: without a movie. It's just like, fuck. It's just the world.
2:31:38
Speaker 1: I think I've reached this before. But for me... maybe
2:31:43
Speaker 1: a second.
2:31:44
Speaker 2: Yes, exactly. People think sometimes they can, oh yeah, I
2:31:47
Speaker 2: can stop thinking for like 30 seconds.
2:31:49
Speaker 1: I can't like hang out in that realm.
2:31:52
Speaker 2: You can if you practice. That's what meditation is for.
2:31:55
Speaker 2: Meditation is not some kind of a magical trick you do.
2:31:58
Speaker 2: What it is, is the use, you train the use
2:32:01
Speaker 2: of your attention in a particular way to bring about
2:32:05
Speaker 2: that realization or just like stay in that state longer
2:32:08
Speaker 2: and longer basically. And there's techniques to do that.
2:32:10
Speaker 1: Hmm. I mean, so do you have a you?
2:32:19
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah. So, for example... You're.
2:32:21
Speaker 1: Able to eliminate the you or collapse it, as you say.
2:32:25
Speaker 1: I mean, is there a you?
2:32:28
Speaker 2: There is no actual you in the sense of, like,
2:32:31
Speaker 2: that's not a thing. The reason it's called an illusion
2:32:34
Speaker 2: is because it's implied in. So, like, if you put,
2:32:38
Speaker 2: you know, this visual illusion of, like, four squares.
2:32:40
Speaker 1: You're saying you is invisible, is invisible as an emotion.
2:32:45
Speaker 1: It's a sphere.
2:32:45
Speaker 2: Well, I'm giving you a visual example. So if you
2:32:47
Speaker 2: have four squares and each square has a little thing
2:32:51
Speaker 2: cut out of it to create the illusion of a
2:32:53
Speaker 2: circle in the middle. You can visualize this right now? Well,
2:32:57
Speaker 2: that circle is what the self is. It's implied because
2:33:02
Speaker 2: of how the squares are. Squares are real. Circle isn't.
2:33:06
Speaker 2: It's just implied. And it's exactly the same thing. Now,
2:33:10
Speaker 2: I can't do this on a fly. That requires a
2:33:12
Speaker 2: pretty high level of meditators to do this on a
2:33:14
Speaker 2: regular basis. I've had it a couple of times, so
2:33:16
Speaker 2: I can report on it. But there's some people that
2:33:18
Speaker 2: claim that they can do this pretty much on the fly.
2:33:20
Speaker 2: They can just turn it on or turn it off.
2:33:23
Speaker 2: And you're fully online, by the way. You're not confused
2:33:27
Speaker 2: or anything. That would be the difference between 5-MeO and
2:33:29
Speaker 2: something like this. You're a fully coherent person. You can
2:33:32
Speaker 2: perform tasks, speak. In fact, there's much higher clarity in
2:33:37
Speaker 2: that state because there's not all this extra work being
2:33:40
Speaker 2: done to try and think about what I am, how
2:33:44
Speaker 2: I appear. None of this is online. You just kind
2:33:46
Speaker 2: of speak.
2:33:51
Speaker 1: What's something I should be asking you that I haven't asked?
2:33:55
Speaker 2: Man, put me on the spot. I don't know. We
2:34:00
Speaker 2: covered quite a bit. Maybe there's something that... Yeah, it's
2:34:05
Speaker 2: something that I guess I already said how would I
2:34:08
Speaker 2: think of it in terms of a question is, what
2:34:10
Speaker 2: should we actually be focused on given the fact that
2:34:14
Speaker 2: we can be aware of so much more of what
2:34:17
Speaker 2: is possible to know? And I'm really passionate about this
2:34:20
Speaker 2: question because I think that that holds the key for
2:34:24
Speaker 2: humanity's future. It's very difficult to adopt because it requires
2:34:28
Speaker 2: actual relinquishing of a lot of the convictions that people hold.
2:34:31
Speaker 2: And it doesn't really matter what it is. If you
2:34:34
Speaker 2: have a very strong conviction of anything, you should lower
2:34:37
Speaker 2: the volume on that. Because first of all, things in
2:34:40
Speaker 2: the world are extremely complex. And even more so when
2:34:44
Speaker 2: it's compounded by the fact that you will never really
2:34:46
Speaker 2: have access to the reality of what the situation really is.
2:34:50
Speaker 2: And this applies, by the way, to anything. So everybody
2:34:53
Speaker 2: whose favorite topic rings in their mind, I'm not implying anything.
2:34:57
Speaker 2: I'm literally speaking of everything. Everything is like this. And
2:35:02
Speaker 2: the only way that I see that humanity will move
2:35:05
Speaker 2: into a future that is worth having is if everybody
2:35:08
Speaker 2: or the majority of people can actually lower the volume
2:35:12
Speaker 2: of what they think they know for sure and then
2:35:14
Speaker 2: allow themselves to just experience the true moment there. Now,
2:35:20
Speaker 2: people like you, for example, you have a lot of reach.
2:35:22
Speaker 2: So what you say and what you think actually does
2:35:25
Speaker 2: do a thing. But for most people, just leaving a
2:35:30
Speaker 2: bunch of comments online, not only it's not doing anything,
2:35:34
Speaker 2: if anything, it just disturbs the field even more. The
2:35:38
Speaker 2: way that I view it, the thing where we can
2:35:40
Speaker 2: move into a future that is truly worth actually having
2:35:43
Speaker 2: and being a part of is if people can actually
2:35:45
Speaker 2: just own their own domain. I've said this on many occasions,
2:35:52
Speaker 2: so it might sound a little repetitive to people who
2:35:54
Speaker 2: follow me, but if you are spending 80% of your
2:35:59
Speaker 2: day criticizing other people, even if you think you're punching up,
2:36:03
Speaker 2: but you haven't done anything today to make someone else's
2:36:07
Speaker 2: life in your life better, ask your neighbor what they
2:36:10
Speaker 2: need help with, like something that you actually did that
2:36:12
Speaker 2: is actually good, then you're just making noises. And you're
2:36:16
Speaker 2: kind of disturbing yourself and everything else. And this is
2:36:19
Speaker 2: why I said it's easier said than done. I'm not preaching.
2:36:21
Speaker 2: I'm guilty of this all the time. But when I'm
2:36:25
Speaker 2: in more clear-headed spaces, I know that I shouldn't. I
2:36:29
Speaker 2: know that if I can, I should move towards more
2:36:32
Speaker 2: and more just kind of focusing on what I can
2:36:33
Speaker 2: do to make someone next to me feel better in
2:36:37
Speaker 2: a genuine way, to help someone. It also feels a
2:36:41
Speaker 2: certain way. There's more of a wholesome feeling to it
2:36:44
Speaker 2: when you truly do something good. So if we can
2:36:46
Speaker 2: focus more on that. And by the way, this does
2:36:49
Speaker 2: not eliminate the fun of interacting with super grand ideas.
2:36:54
Speaker 2: I love them. But you enjoy them even more if
2:36:58
Speaker 2: you know you're acting out of a place of care,
2:37:01
Speaker 2: of love, and you trying to do your best to
2:37:04
Speaker 2: project the best intentions versus the worst intentions, which is something, again,
2:37:07
Speaker 2: I'm guilty of it all the time. But it feels
2:37:10
Speaker 2: different because you get to see possibility. Okay, there's this
2:37:14
Speaker 2: book that I forget the name of, and I didn't
2:37:16
Speaker 2: even read, to be honest. But the idea that somebody
2:37:19
Speaker 2: explained to me from the book really resonated. It's something
2:37:21
Speaker 2: about frames. So it's all about what kind of frame
2:37:27
Speaker 2: you project around a person. So let's say, if somebody
2:37:31
Speaker 2: even is trying to pull a fast one on you
2:37:33
Speaker 2: right they're kind of trying to pull some shit right
2:37:36
Speaker 2: if if you can do this in a genuine way
2:37:38
Speaker 2: which is very tricky it's very hard because usually if
2:37:40
Speaker 2: you identify that you go like oh nobody you know
2:37:44
Speaker 2: i mean like you start getting like all you you
2:37:46
Speaker 2: lock your horns but if you can just like genuinely
2:37:50
Speaker 2: project something onto them, like actually see them in a
2:37:54
Speaker 2: really positive light, but truly, they will actually have a
2:37:57
Speaker 2: very hard time to still do that. Because people don't
2:38:02
Speaker 2: want to lose something good. It's a lot more painful
2:38:04
Speaker 2: to lose something than the fear of not having it ever.
2:38:08
Speaker 2: If I just tell you that I would have given
2:38:10
Speaker 2: you $ 20 but never gave it to you versus giving
2:38:13
Speaker 2: you $ 20 like in a casino and then taking them
2:38:15
Speaker 2: away from you, You ended up with the same amount
2:38:17
Speaker 2: of money anyway, but that second one was way more
2:38:19
Speaker 2: painful because I took something away from you. If I'm
2:38:22
Speaker 2: giving you this positive outlook of you, again, still, it
2:38:25
Speaker 2: has to be within the bounds of reason, of course,
2:38:28
Speaker 2: but people, they will identify that and it will be
2:38:32
Speaker 2: very hard for them to still do that thing because
2:38:34
Speaker 2: that means they will lose that positive outlook of themselves.
2:38:37
Speaker 2: If we can just project more of that onto one another,
2:38:39
Speaker 2: and again, it doesn't mean we have to be delusional.
2:38:42
Speaker 2: We can still fix everything that needs to be fixed
2:38:44
Speaker 2: and criticize properly all the things that need to be
2:38:48
Speaker 2: uh criticized but there's if there's just a little bit
2:38:51
Speaker 2: more of i guess i guess the word is grace
2:38:54
Speaker 2: there's a little bit more grace in the understanding that
2:38:57
Speaker 2: most people are just trying their best and failing most
2:39:01
Speaker 2: people are not this you know conniving mustache twirling you
2:39:06
Speaker 2: know like just just want to mess things up most
2:39:09
Speaker 2: people do their best and failing because they don't know
2:39:11
Speaker 2: any better and if we can just have a little
2:39:13
Speaker 2: bit more of that And we can still take strong
2:39:16
Speaker 2: action and we can still do everything that needs to
2:39:18
Speaker 2: be done. And we just recognize that the majority of
2:39:21
Speaker 2: people are not psychopaths. They're just like everybody else. To me,
2:39:25
Speaker 2: that's the remedy to try and move the world into
2:39:29
Speaker 2: a better place because ultimately the world is a collection
2:39:32
Speaker 2: of personal interactions just on different scales. So if you
2:39:36
Speaker 2: can raise a generation of children that is more like that,
2:39:41
Speaker 2: it's a lot easier to do things in a different way.
2:39:44
Speaker 2: and of course I'm aware that it seems to be
2:39:47
Speaker 2: like an infinite distance from us, but I think it's possible.
2:39:51
Speaker 2: When I watch my daughter grow, I'm like, I want
2:39:53
Speaker 2: to do more of that so she gets to grow
2:39:56
Speaker 2: into a world that she would really enjoy.
2:39:58
Speaker 1: I love that. It's a great way to end this.
2:40:05
Speaker 2: Thank you for having me, Sean.
2:40:06
Speaker 1: Yeah, thank you for coming. That was awesome. Thank you.
2:40:11
Speaker 1: Thank you.
2:40:12
Speaker 2: I enjoyed it.
2:40:13
Speaker 1: Hope to see you again.
2:40:14
Speaker 2: I hope so too.
2:40:28
Speaker 1: No matter where you're watching The Sean Ryan Show from,
2:40:31
Speaker 1: if you get anything out of this at all, anything,
2:40:35
Speaker 1: please like, comment, and subscribe. And most importantly, share this
2:40:42
Speaker 1: everywhere possible. you possibly can. And if you're feeling extra generous,
2:40:48
Speaker 1: head to Apple Podcasts and Spotify and leave us a review.