http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcLWTuwT7Kk&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SehnU2XQeO0&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRU3VzVXJRA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSXdhLS5or4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sb1NMYR4VY&feature=related

It's an interview with physicist Tom Campbell who tells about his work with Robert A. Monroe before TMI was founded, and the basics of his theory of everything (which is not really substantial in my view, typical physicistic philosophying, but some good points), and finally comes back to what's nonphysical and what's physical reality and how they relate.

Spooky

This sort of relates to the Jane Roberts Seth thread I started. I basically believe that there are beings who know how use creative mind energy in many ways. Sometimes they do so so that learning experiences such as this World can be utilized.

Sometimes people like to make a division between physical and non-physical when such a division doesn't actually exist. Energy, whatever it is, simply exists.

I didn't look at the Youtube videos because I can't while at work.

I think generally he's right on, only when he started explaining his theory he fell back to physicistic, objective terms.

One interesting thing is, he tells when he worked as a test person in Monroes first soundlab, they found they had met up nonphysically with other test persons. But when Monroe played back the recordings of the reports they had given during the sessions, he was like hit on the head, that this had been truely real. It's something which Bruce does emphasize, one can be in a state of semi-knowledge, seemingly accepting the reality of the nonphysical, but when one really experiences an undeniable, "hard" verification, it's something different, then one really "knows" and this will remove quickly blockades of perception.

Spooky

I’ve read his books as well as watched these videos. I generally think he’s right on, too. His model for his theory of everything isn’t widely accepted by mainstream physicists, but to me it explains a lot of the inconsistencies of what is seen in non-physical reality. The books are written with humor and in language that is very understandable, not a lot of technical jargon. I wouldn’t recommend them to everyone, but well worth the read especially if done with thoughtful open-mindedness and skepticism. On the downside, there’s a lot of repetition which to me seemed incredibly boring at times or at least I found myself falling asleep while reading quite often. And there is no index.

Basically his theory involves two assumptions: That God exists, which he calls “Absolute Unbounded Oneness” and the fundamental process of evolution. With only these two assumptions he is able to explain our entire human experience including non-physical realities in ways that I thought were very logical.

Kathy

I think the thing that makes his 'theory' so founded is he says be skeptical, open minded and go build your own Big Toe. Now how many herd orientated mainstream physicists are going to prove him wrong from doing their own research with their own experiences? Subjective vs Objective results. Some people don't trust themselves I suppose  even when objective results are created at times ;)

To build your TOE you have to let go of beliefs, egos and fears.   Only there, you can build objectives results by doing a lot of subjectives experiences ;)

I should probably clarify what I meant. From what I’ve read mainstream physicists don’t give much credence to the idea that our physical world is a virtual reality, which is a primary premise of Campbell’s theory. However, there are others that would agree with Campbell in the sense that a virtual reality seems to solve some problems in quantum physics. There’s a link to a paper PhantasyMan posted in the Science forum that discusses this. Thanks PM.

Kathy