LAYERS OF MEANING
A previous essay having
to do with superpower processes and layers of meaning discussed
concept that all situations and all things have several layers
These layers range from the obvious through several kinds of meanings
that become increasingly so subtle that they may not at all impinge
on the processes of recognition.
The several situations
that encompass remote viewing cannot escape from the difficulties
this implies, in that information achieved via remote viewing
is clearly one of the things that can have multiple layers of
To get this present
discussion started, it needs to be pointed up that what is being
referred to does NOT fall into the area of semantic difficulty.
The principal definition of SEMANTICS is given as: “The
historical and psychological study and classification of changes
in significance of words or forms viewed as factors in linguistic
Rather, what is being
referred to in this essay is that things and situations have multiple
meanings that differ in significance, purpose, or connotation,
or in import and implication.
Recognition of such meanings has to be achieved by deducing or
inference, or via insight or intuition, etc.
For example, if a
fifty-ton rock is tumbling down the hill toward you, the meaning
rapidly to be deduced or inferred is that you rapidly better get
out of its way – this being a rather obvious meaning.
The one complexity
that enters into this discussion is that aspiring and ostensible
remote viewers are expected to detect meanings independently of
the five physical senses, these senses being considered, in conventional
terms, the only real source of deducing and inferring, and which
are arrived at via reason and logic based upon a fixed set of
The contexts of this
essay escape the foregoing, and largely dreary, debate simply
by accepting that remote viewing is possible - and it is therewith
that we can turn attention to the problems of multiple layers
of meanings within the contexts of remote viewing processes.
As it is, remote viewers
are expected to view things, situations, and meanings without
depending on the limited ranges of the five physical senses. This
constitutes an activity thought impossible in modernist conventional
terms, but accepted as possible in most pre-modern cultures.
THE HELLA HAMID BREAKTHROUGH
IN REMOTE VIEWING
To jump into this
as quickly as possible, a woman named Hella Hammid proved to be
a rather efficient natural remote viewer within the early part
of the remote viewing project at Stanford Research Institute in
Hella was an extremely cultured person, a great photographer,
and usually a joy to be with.
One day in keeping
with a long line of experiments she was participating in, she
was given a certain target to remote view. She ultimately sketched
a large, hot, steaming teapot with a lid on it, and placed on
some kind of crisscrossing tripod support.
However, the designated
distant target was a small nuclear reactor.
In standard parapsychological terms, this was a clear miss, and
it could be concluded that no remote viewing had taken place,
even though she had been very successful in earlier experiments.
Someone (guess who)
thought to ask Hella if she had ever seen a nuclear reactor. Except
for pictures of nuclear reactor out-buildings, it was thus determined
that she had not, nor had she ever studied drawings, photos, or
blueprints of nuclear reactor interiors.
So, as an enjoyable
outing, we all visited the small nuclear reactor, examined it
closely, and then collected schematic examples of other kinds
of reactors – which are relatively the same except for size
and dimensions. And, when on line, they all produce heat and steam,
as well as radiation which must somehow be contained.
At a later date, another
nuclear reactor target was sandwiched into her random target pool,
and when that target came up she promptly said “Oh, that’s
another of those nuclear reactors.”
Now, the reader needs
to pay close attention to the following - because this first experiment
with Hella proved to be one of the most important benchmarks that
ultimately led to training routines being discovered for increasing
remote viewing efficiency.
As already mentioned,
when Hella did not get the first target correctly, in the standard
contexts of parapsychology,, she missed the target, except for
some few descriptive similarities in the case of the teapot.
In those parapsychology contexts, such matters as clairvoyance
and remote viewing are considered as matters of perception, and
so Hella had not perceived the target.
However, when her
“failed” experiment is considered not in the contexts
of perception, but in the contexts of the signal-to-noise ratio,
her “failed” experiment can be analyzed differently.
FIRST, in response
to the target, she sketched a hot steaming teapot with a lid on
it, and on top of some kind of tripod.
SECOND, since she
did not get the target, her response could be considered as some
kind of noise, because her response generated an image that was
not an image of a nuclear reactor.
THIRD, some of the
descriptors in her drawing, i.e., hot, steaming, contained in
a pot, are also analogous descriptors of a nuclear reactor if
it is on line. A nuclear reactor is hot in several ways, produces
steam, and its rods are surrounded by some kind of containment
unit. Furthermore, such containment units are seriously supported
on foundations of metal struts fixed into cement, etc.
FOURTH, the only thing
out of place in Hella’s response is that the target had
been incorrectly identified as a teapot.
FIFTH, when asked
if she had ever seen a nuclear reactor or knew anything about
them, she replied in the negative.
SIXTH, she and others
were then exposed to study and orientation regarding facets of
SEVENTH, when in the
future she was given a nuclear reactor as a remote-viewing target,
she quickly identified it correctly.
EIGHTH, when, in discussing
both RV sessions, Hella was asked if she knew why she drew the
teapot, she replied something like: “I guess it was the
next best thing in my experience, for I had no experience of nuclear
Put another way, her
meaning-memory banks contained no experience of nuclear reactors,
but very good experience of hot, steaming teapots.
The mix of the eight
aspects outlined above now needs to be considered.
In studies of how
perception works, it has long been held that mental images are
formed first, and only then do estimations of their meaning take
But, and very briefly,
in signal-to-noise theory when applied to the human nervous systems:
In any event, within
the contexts of RV research at SRI, it turned out that meaning
(of things and situations) was the fulcrum of functioning BETWEEN
signal in-put and mental images of them.
This is to say that
remote viewing does not begin with mental perceptions, whether
in the form of feelings or images that are propelled into the
state of conscious awareness of them.
Rather, these are
the end products of the two preceding steps, both of which are
contained in functions that are pre-conscious beneath conscious
awareness of them.
TWO GENERAL TYPES
As to types of meaning,
these may be numerous. But there certainly are at least two general
types, i.e., meanings that can be deduced about things and situations
in general, and meanings that in particular arise from meaning-memory
storage at the individual level.
In explanation of
this, it is generally thought, in philosophy anyway, that all
things are redolent with intrinsic possible meanings.
But at the individual level, any deducing of meanings is principally
confined to the contexts of meaning that have accumulated and
achieved storage in the individual’s memory banks.
Therefore, meanings outside the range of the individual’s
meaning-memory banks might have little chance of being recognized
at all, or might be interpreted only within the contexts of analogous
meanings that HAVE achieved memory storage.
MEMORY RESEARCH DIFFICULTIES
Efforts to research
and dissect what memory consists of have proven to be extremely
An excellent consideration
of those difficulties is described in a fascinating book published
by George Johnson in 1992 entitled IN THE PALACES OF MEMORY, with
the subtitle HOW WE BUILD THE WORLDS INSIDE OUR HEADS.
The book sums up the excruciating, but often humorous, difficulties
in researching memory, and the very little real understanding
that has downloaded from such research.
But the three major
parts of the book, “Mucking Around in the Wetware,”
“A Brain in a Box,” and “The Memory Machine,”
are splendidly readable and should be studied very carefully by
anyone interested in remote viewing.
Indeed, if aspiring remote viewers were to read and study only
one book, IN THE PALACES OF MEMORY would be it.
The reason is that although it reviews memory research per se,
what is discussed in it goes on in the heads of every aspiring
remote viewer. And what goes on in the heads of each remote viewer
is directly and fully significant with respect to all attempts
at remote viewing.
The book is an excellent
clear read, easy to understand, and is absolutely hilarious here
THE INNATE EXISTENCE
OF MEANING-MEMORY STORAGE IN OUR SPECIES
Each specimen of our
species, each individual, possesses innate and very basic hard
drive functions via which “the worlds inside our heads”
are built, and are thence characterized by whatever achieves some
kind of imprint in the wetware of memory storage.
At some point, usually early in life, the imprinted contents in
the wetware begin altogether to function as a memory machine –
and can actually do so even if dimensions of the contents are,
well, quite sparse, narrow, or thin.
But even so, quite strong reality boxes are formatted within the
resulting memory machines, and these are specific to whatever
meaning-information has achieved memory storage.
THE MULTITUDES OF
HUMAN CELLULAR RECEPTORS THAT IN-TAKE “INFORMATION”
Now, with regard to
the processes of remote viewing, some issues that are additionally
important need to be pointed up.
The first of these
issues is that viewers do not view a remote “target”
via their five physical senses.
Remote viewing provides
information about things and situations distant in space and time
from local surroundings, and if such information proves to have
some degree of correctness, it is clearly legitimate to wonder
what senses and sensing systems have made the distant information
Prior to the onset
(in the latter three decades of the twentieth century) of discoveries
of thousands of cellular information receptors extant throughout
the biological networks of human nervous systems, there was hardly
anything that shed any light on how interactions with distant
information could be possible.
The topic of such
receptors has already been discussed at some length in other essays
in this website. And so there is no need repeat details here –
except to mention that such receptors exist because they are a
full part of the human genome – and thus download into all
individuals of the species.
Once the combined
dimensions of human information receptors are appropriately grasped
and understood, it can be seen that the human receptor range is
As but one example,
sensing receptors in the pineal gland, if it is good health, are
continuously busy sensing the sun and its changing conditions.
This particular sensing is usually taking place beneath conscious
awareness of it. But apart from that, it is safe to point up that
the sun is at some great distance from Earth, and so it can be
thought that pineal gland receptors are remote viewing the sun.
In addition to pineal
gland receptors (which also function at the X-ray level), many
other receptors of a similar nature have been identified with
respect to distant sensing.
And so not only are various kinds of “remote viewing”
possible, but they are already taking place throughout human nervous
systems, albeit at levels usually beneath conscious awareness
And so arises the second issue mentioned above. This has to do
with what does and what does not get into conscious awareness.
This, in turn, has to do turn with how parameters of conscious
awareness are conditioned to function.
CAN BE FORMATTED
IN ACCORD WITH EXPERIENCE AND SOCIAL CONDITIONING
It is quite evident
that the concept of conscious awareness looms exceedingly large
in our appreciation of ourselves.
However, it has been
scientifically understood since the 1950s that conscious awareness
is but something like one part to a million parts that are never
incorporated into it – even though the million parts are
in constant activity beneath conscious awareness of them.
Furthermore, it has
been understood (probably from the Year One of our species) that
the small conscious awareness parts of our otherwise incredibly
complex and magnificent systems, are entirely susceptible not
only to all kinds of environmental conditioning, but also to social
conditioning practices erected by humans themselves.
It is commonly thought
that social conditioning results from social force, or by selectively
educating in certain areas but not others.
And it is in those contexts that people sometimes object to this
or that kind of social conditioning, and thereby seek to overthrow
or escape from them.
A good example of this consists of the “need-to-know”
principle, i.e., who needs to know what, and who doesn’t
need to know it, and then preventing the latter from ever knowing
But a deeper study
of social conditioning easily shows that social control of meanings
is at its strategic heart – for socially conditioned individuals
can act on meanings they understand, but cannot too much act on
whatever meanings evade them.
Indeed, no one, including aspiring remote viewers, can act on
meanings that evade them. In this sense, it is not too much to
say that the meaning-less is invisible.
It thus emerges that
control of meanings is the most active principle not only within
the contexts of social conditioning but also within the contexts
of whatever the individual does and does not achieve conscious
The reader might think
that this brief discussion about social conditioning is a needless
detour with respect to remote viewing issues.
But an in-depth study of social conditioning practices ultimately
reveals that all individuals of our species not only have scads
of information receptors, but also have inherent systems for meaning
detecting and deducing.
If this were NOT the
case, then there would be no need for social conditioning practices
whose central objective is to modulate and contain the innate
existence of the meaning detection and deduction systems that
are inherent in our species.
In 1983, the very
world-wise John Kenneth Galbraith published a book entitled THE
ANATOMY OF POWER, in which he indicated two things.
First, that social
conditioning is set up on behalf of achieving and maintaining
social power, and second, that the significance of social conditioning
is seriously underestimated.
What Galbraith did
not point up, however, is that social conditioning is effective
only to the degree that it is successful with respect to modulating
and controlling the meaning detection systems that are inherent
not only within specific societal groupings, but within our species
Indeed, we know that
our species possesses sensing systems that access millions of
bits of information, but we also attribute intelligence to the
Well, one cannot exactly go directly from inherent sensing systems
to inherent intelligence in the absence of inherent meaning detecting
systems AND inherent memory-meaning storage systems that accumulate
and retrieve meaning bits.
It thus transpires
that whatever meanings are imprinted into AND not imprinted into
meaning storage systems of individuals has a great deal to do
with what does or does not emerge into their conscious awareness.
A PROBLEM CENTRAL
TO REMOTE VIEWING SUCCESS
What all this boils
down to in the case of remote viewing is that absent meaning-memory
storage can have serious repercussions.
This was demonstrated in the case of the Hella Hammid RV experiment
where she got a steaming teapot.
Well, it is fortunate that her RV experiment was only an experiment
– for imagine what would have happened if the effort had
been an operational one, and intelligence analysts were interested
in what was actually at the target location.
In such a case, the analysts would have been told that the remote
viewer says there is a big teapot at the location they were interested
As it turned out,
Hella’s experiment was by no means a failed one, because
it brought to light a central problem relevant to the larger scope
of all remote viewing processes.
For when it was determined that she had no intimate meaning-knowledge
of what nuclear reactors actually looked like, it could also be
determined that her meaning-detecting systems segued over to the
next best thing her systems held meaning of.
help at SRI, a number of previous “failed” experiments
of her’s and of others were reevaluated. It was discovered
generally that the “failures” lay in the contexts
of absent or misplaced meaning relevant to what was being remote
In other words, the
remote viewer was NOT missing remote viewing, but his or her meaning-memory
systems had pockets of absent meanings.
CORRECTING THE ABSENT
As one last reference
here to Hella Hammid, she took a deep interest in this problem,
and one of the results was that she became very expert in detecting
absent meaning problems in target responses of other remote viewing
But as she, herself, first observed, she could not see her own
absent meaning contexts because they were, after all, missing
Well, there are many remote viewing examples of this. And indeed,
in the larger picture of all things, it is difficult for individuals
to see what is missing in themselves – because whatever
it is, IS missing.
Even so, there was
yet another significant development with regard to Hella.
After a while in continuing
RV experiments, she began to sense elements of targets she was
This enabled her to
say one of two things: “I’m missing something about
this target,” or “I don’t know what the target
is” – and, most importantly, to express this BEFORE
her systems segued over to the next best analytical overlay.
There is only one
way to explain this change in her pre-conscious processing systems.
Because she had become
consciously aware of and interested in this problem, it had taken
on meaning within her.
As a result, it is possible to think that new connections had
sprouted within and among her synapses and neurons, and a new
circuit had formatted thereby. This new circuit thence created
jabs of recognition regarding the absence of meaning-memory.
There is only one
way to account for this – that the pre-conscious meaning
circuits are SELF-CORRECTING when new and meaningful information
is added into them – which they absolutely have to be in
order to function at all.
Otherwise, there would never be any additive memory growth regarding
what can emerge into conscious awareness of them.
It was this particular
self-correcting aspect that made an RV training program feasible.
So, this breakthrough
of understanding placed the developmental RV project at SRI on
very solid grounds with respect to, believe it or not, conventional
terms acceptable to the project’s very serious oversight
committees. This needs a bit of explaining.
It had long been understood
that a tiny portion of the brain is always PHYSICALLY changing
at its cellular levels with respect to what is newly experienced
or to new meanings that are recognized as such.
The physical changes involve the sprouting of new connections
being made among and between neurons and synapses, and elsewhere
in the nervous system, that end up as a new circuit that will
produce a jab of meaning recognition if and when the experience
or meanings are encountered again.
Something along these
lines indeed turned out to be the case with Hella after she had
consumed a fair amount of written and especially of visual information
relevant to nuclear reactors.
From all of this, and
specifically from the remote-viewing point of view anyway, it
was slowly understood that meaning-memory already incorporated
into individual reality boxes, although important enough on average,
was not as important as was absent meaning-memory.
But here was a situation
that had long been understood in educational systems everywhere:
I.e., absent meaning-memory can be filled in by exposing individuals
to meaning-information packages that were absent before.
And if the exposure is sufficient enough and seen as meaningful
enough, then the synapses and neurons of the brain and nervous
systems will do the rest - and the resulting new circuits will
be incorporated into the meaning-detecting systems already innately
existing in everyone beneath conscious awareness of them.
TEASING OUT SEVERAL
LAYERS OF MEANING
Now, the whole of
what has been discussed so far in this essay might seem somewhat
distant to the project of teasing seven layers of meaning out
of any given situation or thing.
But don’t count on any permanence of that distance too much,
for as will be discussed in a forthcoming essay, meaning-memories
Therefore, meaning-memories can produce new combinations among
themselves, and do so all on their own – and which recombinant
process is one format of the superpower we presently refer to
This aspect of our species is wondrous, indeed.