Basic Theories and Implication

If one thing is evident from the results of PEAR's decades of work, it's the need for an expanded scientific framework. The connections between consciousness and the physical world pose new questions about reality. To answer them, we will have to update our theories of physics and psychology.

Part of PEAR's work involved seeing how their experimental evidence fit with prevailing cultural and scientific paradigms. In some cases, the "proactive" role of consciousness fit very well with dominant belief systems. These were mostly in the humanistic realm, where subjectivity is emphasized. For example, musicians are accustomed to the idea of "resonance" and intuition between band members, and that these factors have a lot to do with the quality of music they create.

PEAR's findings also supported a few scientific conventions, too, such as the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle in chemistry. This says that electrons only have precise positions when an observer looks for them. It also fits with the famous "double-slit experiment," which shows that electrons behave like waves, until someone looks at them. When they are observed, they start acting like particles, and even "decide" to take certain paths (1). So it follows that an observer (consciousness) may be able to influence quantum probabilities by interacting with the REG.

Mostly, however, PEAR's findings are new territory, not explained by dominant theories. With their interdisciplinary perspective, PEAR began to explore the kinds of changes and adjustments we might need, to better understand the world and the consciousness within it. The following pages summarize 6 of their major efforts.

(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment