The following was written originally as part of the Masters Dissertation for Advancing Nursing Practice by Ariana Ayu at the University of Edinburgh in 2010 (the dissertation was looking at biofield healing modalities and their use and research in nursing practice). The information below is my summary of Lynne McTaggart's informative and interesting book The Field. The full reference is listed at the bottom of the page. Read her book - it is mind-blowing!
Quantum physics tells us that all matter is composed of energy that, when broken down into subatomic particles, acts as both a particle and a wave, and whose behaviour is inconsistent and influenced by the observer (McTaggart, 2008). The Heisenburg uncertainty principle (developed in 1927) states that because of the participatory relationship between the observer and the observed, we can only observe one of the physical properties of subatomic particles at a time: either its energy or its lifetime (McTaggart, 2008). Additionally, because energy can neither be created nor destroyed (and is therefore always around us in a state of flux), scientists have discovered what is referred to as the Zero Point Field, and sometimes referred to as the vacuum (McTaggart, 2008, p. 19).
The Zero Point Field refers to the motion of subatomic particles when slowed down to the lowest point that science (or mathematical calculations) can slow matter to – this energy is never actually still, and could be referred to as the basic level of movement that is omnipresent in our universe (McTaggart, 2008). The Zero Point Field has been referred to as “a quantum sea of light” (McTaggart, 2008, p. 21) because of the nature of energy (or light) as a constant wave that neither ends nor begins, and surrounds and permeates what we perceive to be our physical world. Michael Faraday pioneered the concept of electromagnetic fields in the mid-nineteenth century, and scientists have explored and built on this concept to explain forces that act upon solid objects (McTaggart, 2008). The Zero Point Field goes even further than the discovery of electromagnetic fields, however, and acts as the most basic structure of existence that science can currently conceive. It is a field (which simply means an area of influence) that contains all other fields (including all of the electromagnetic fields of individual objects and their interrelated fields) and contains greater energy than the energy of all matter combined (McTaggart, 2008).
The Zero Point Field is an underlying structure that accounts for the stability of matter and connects everything in the universe through its waves (McTaggart, 2008). Because of the process of coherence (two or more waves matching frequency or coming into sync with each other when they collide), the Zero Point Field acts as a repository for all that is and ever has been, similar to Carl Jung's concept of the collective unconscious. The implications of the existence of this field are far-reaching, and quantum calculations have shown matter as we perceive it to be an illusion, as the inertia or stillness that we attribute to physical objects is more accurately resistance of a group of particles to being moved through the field (McTaggart, 2008).
The Zero Point Field also explains the principle of nonlocality, which Einstein referred to as spooky action at a distance (McTaggart, 2008, p. 29) meaning the apparent ability of a particle to instantaneously influence another particle, regardless of the amount of distance between them and without exchanging energy (McTaggart, 2008). A useful way to think of it is:
“analogous to two sticks planted in the sand at the edge of the ocean about to be hit by a rolling wave. If you didn't know about the wave, and both sticks fell down because of it one after the other, you might think one stick had affected the other at a distance, and call that a non-local effect” (McTaggart, 2008, p.29).
Understanding the Zero Point Field, the concept of quantum coherence, and that what we conceive of as matter is actually energy, explains the phenomenon of nonlocality, and how something that affects one object can simultaneously affect another object over a great distance (McTaggart, 2008).
Rupert Sheldrake (a British biologist) took this concept into biology with what he termed "morphic fields" (McTaggart, 2008, p. 47). This morphic resonance (memory) of cells and even entire species was what he postulated allowed stem cells in the body to differentiate between whether they were supposed to become hair, arms, blood cells, etc., and instructs members of a species to physically develop and instinctively know how to behave (McTaggart, 2008). The physics of this was explained by Fritz-Albert Popp (a theoretical biophysicist from Germany), who discovered that weak light emissions were able to instruct the development of stem cells into different body parts (McTaggart, 2008). This was confirmed by neuroanatomy research of Harold S. Burr in the 1940s measuring the electrical fields around salamanders, which showed that electrical changes accompanied physiological functions such as sleep, growth, regeneration, tumor development, and even outside influences such as storms, the waxing and waning of the moon (McTaggart, 2008).
Popp further confirmed the electrical and energetic nature of the body with his discovery that all living things emitted photons, and that these light emissions had a predictable pattern (biorhythms) that was disruption in cases of cancer and multiple sclerosis (McTaggart, 2008). He further confirmed that DNA communicated with the body via a feedback system of frequencies (waves of energy), which agreed with Burr's salamander research showing that the electromagnetic field of a full-grown salamander was imprinted even on an unfertilised egg, thereby demonstrating the interaction of the Zero Point Field with physical growth and development (McTaggart, 2008). Popp's research also showed that the light emissions (photons) from healthy people were much lower and more coherent than the emissions from unhealthy people (the same was true for food produced factory-style, i.e caged chickens emitted more photons than free range chickens) (McTaggart, 2008). Basically, a healthy body uses energy in the most efficient (coherent) way, while a sick body is unable to synchronise with the appropriate structural pattern found in the Zero Point Field. This discovery explained that “health was a state of perfect subatomic communication, and ill health was a state where communication breaks down” (McTaggart, 2008, p. 52).
Popp's research continued to show that these photon emissions and wave resonances were not only used for internal communication, but there exists an exchange of photons between living beings, and that molecules actually communicate with each other through oscillating frequencies (or energy waves) (McTaggart, 2008). This was complimented by the work of Emilio Del Giudice and Giuliano Preparata (Italian physicists) who discovered that water molecules, when in close contact with other water molecules, form a coherent domain – that is, they have a coherence that allows them to transmit information (frequencies), whether or not the initial molecule containing the information is still present (McTaggart, 2008). By shaking the water, the waves come into coherence more quickly, and once the molecules are all harmonised, they are able to record, amplify, and transmit frequencies to other water molecules. This explains the process of transmitting frequencies through the body: the water acts as a transmitter to send waves of energy, which in turn gives individual cells the messages required for the cells to move into action (McTaggart, 2008).
Our perception is also influenced by the Zero Point Field. Over the course of the twentieth century, the work of Carl Pribram (an American neurosurgeon), Paul Pietsch (an American biologist), Russell and Karen DeValois (American neurophysiologists), and Fergus Campbell (a British researcher from Cambridge University) showed that despite the prevailing neurological theories, human and animal brains actually store information in a holographic format (McTaggart, 2008). When we see an object, what is actually happening is that the brain is interpreting and transforming a pattern of energy frequencies into what we perceive as concrete; we are essentially creating our world through our perceptions (McTaggart, 2008). This has greater implications into the holographic nature of quantum and zero-point waves in that (as shown by the scientists mentioned above) while brain activity may be somewhat localised (different parts of the brain performing different tasks), if brain damage occurs, the brain is often able to compensate and still fulfill tasks despite the physical damage (McTaggart, 2008).
Separately, Primbram and Russell DeValois discovered that human and animal brains only respond to certain frequencies, filtering out the rest like a radio tuner. This is highly important, since the Zero Point Field contains limitless frequencies, and without some sort of filtering mechanism, this could easily overwhelm the brain with information (McTaggart, 2008). This led Primbram to postulate that in the brain, these holographic wave frequencies occur in the spaces between the dendrites (nerve endings on the neurons [brain cells]) and the synapses (the part of the neuron that sends the electrical charge) (McTaggart, 2008). This was eventually proved correct by Walter Schempp (a German mathematician, MD, and radiologist) in his quest to improve the modern MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging) machine, which at that time required patients to remain still for four hours (McTaggart, 2008). In corresponding and sharing their discoveries, Primbram and Schempp found confirmation that what we consider perception was merely an interpretation of the Zero Point Field, and that:
“We didn't see objects per se, but only their quantum information and out of that constructed our image of the world. Perceiving the world was a matter of tuning into the Zero Point Field” (McTaggart, 2008, p. 91).
These breakthroughs in neuroscience, were aided by the work of Stuart Hameroff (an American anesthesiologist), Kunio Yasue (a Japanese quantum physicist), and Scott Hagan (an American physicist) (McTaggart, 2008). Along with Pribram, they theorised that the dendrites and microtubules (cell walls) acted as the body's internet: allowing all of the body's neurons to receive the same information at the same time, through a process they called superradiance (McTaggart, 2008). Superradiance provides coherence of the body's waves, promoting unity of thought and the ability of different body parts to work instantaneously and in harmony (such as in the synchronisation of brain waves in EEG patterns (McTaggart, 2008).
These findings confirmed the work of the physicist David Bohm, whose theory of unbroken wholeness (unified mind and matter) stated that:
“The universe was a vast dynamic cobweb of energy exchange, with a basic substructure containing all possible versions of all possible forms of matter. Its unifying mechanism was not a fortunate mistake but information which had been encoded and transmitted everywhere at once” (McTaggart, 2008, pp. 94-95).
If the universe is indeed comprised entirely of energy, and all energy is affected by coherence and connected via the Zero Point Field, a logical question is what effect intention can have on the Zero Point Field. In the 1960s, Helmut Schmidt conducted studies with purported psychics to see if they could influence the outcome of a machine that randomly generated coin flips. Statistically, the results should have been approximately fifty percent heads and fifty percent tails, but Schmidt's results were as high as fifty-four percent, which was a statistically significant result (McTaggart, 2008). Attempting to answer this question outside of the paranormal field, Robert Jahn (an engineering professor at Princeton University) replicated and improved upon Schmidt's studies by working with "normal" people, to see if this ability was present in all people or just those who were reported to be psychic (McTaggart, 2008). Jahn and his partner Brenda Dunne (a developmental psychologist) performed the study for over a decade (known as the PEAR studies) and conducted over two and a half million trials. They found that in fifty-two percent of the trials, participants were able to influence the coin toss to go in the direction they wanted, while almost two-thirds of all participants were able to influence the machines' outcomes in one way or another (McTaggart, 2008).
The PEAR studies might not have appeared to have very effective results at face value (i.e. fifty-two percent in the study versus fifty percent which was to be expected by chance), yet their effect size was ten times greater than the effect size of aspirin in preventing heart attacks (the effect size of aspirin is 0.03) (McTaggart, 2008, p. 117). The US National Research Council reviewed the results as well, and stated that the effect was most certainly not a case of chance (McTaggart, 2008). This led to the conclusion that our attention and intention shape the world around us by creating coherence, which was further confirmed by additional studies with couples, whose effect on the machines was almost six times the effect of a single operator. This can be explained by the idea that a bonded pair has already developed coherence between themselves and therefore can exert a greater coherent force (i.e. superradiance) to influence the machine (McTaggart, 2008).
These statistically significant results would be impressive enough if the studies were just conducted with humans, but French scientist Rene' Peoc'h carried out similar experiments with baby chicks and rabbits. Peoc'h found that the chicks and rabbits were able to will robotic "mothers" away from or towards them, thus demonstrating that even animals could influence their world through what he called inferred intention (McTaggart, 2008). Research on biofeedback had shown that humans could influence their own bodies through relaxation and intention, but the ability to influence something outside of one's own body was a staggering finding (McTaggart, 2008).
William Braud (an American behaviourist) wanted to measure how much effect people could have with their intention, and found that people were able to influence fish, gerbils, red blood cells, and eventually other people (McTaggart, 2008). Braud's study measuring electrodermal activity (an unconscious sympathetic nervous system response assessed via electrodes on the skin – i.e. polygraph or lie detector machine) demonstrated increased nervous system arousal when people were being stared at (via a video camera in another room) fifty-nine percent of the time. Chance could only be expected to cause this response fifty percent of the time, and the schedule of staring/ looking away was determined via a computer-randomised algorithm to prevent the starers from using any pattern that could invalidate the results (McTaggart, 2008).
Braud's research continued in his 1983 partnership with anthropologist Marilyn Schlitz, which determined (via effect size) that people could statistically have the almost same effect of calming subjects as the subjects could have on themselves using biofeedback mechanisms (McTaggart, 2008). Braud and Schlitz determined that the effect was much greater on people who needed the intervention (highly nervous/ agitated or wandering minds), than on people who were already calm and focused (McTaggart, 2008). To follow this, Braud and Schlitz conducted a meta-analysis (a thorough scientific analysis of all available research) of research conducted on intention which showed that while the effect sizes were small, they were consistently achieved by people with no prior experience or training in using intention to influence other living things (the beings influenced ranged from simple bacteria all the way to complex animal and human systems). The overall success rate of the studies was expected to be five percent if attributable to chance, while the actual combined success rate was thirty-seven percent (the studies conducted by Braud and Schlitz had by themselves a forty-seven percent success rate). Braud also discovered that intention worked best as a process of gentle wishing – when the attempts were more strenuous or intense, the results were less successful (McTaggart, 2008).
Braud discovered several more factors that increased the odds of success: relaxation, reduced sensory input, increased right-brain function, a belief in the possibility of success, and a belief in the interconnectedness of life and awareness of non-traditional forms of communication, a recipient who is in need or somehow less organised than the sender (McTaggart, 2008). These factors were put to the test by Mahareshi Mahesh Yogi (founder of Transcendental Meditation), along with Charles Honorton (an American clinician) and Adrian Parker (a University of Edinburgh psychologist) who were studying the effects of meditation and sensory deprivation using the German ganzfeld sensory deprivation technique (McTaggart, 2008). In a meta-analysis of the ganzfeld studies, the result was ten billion to one against the possibility the results were a matter of chance (McTaggart, 2008).
It would appear from these results, that when people are able to enter into states of altered consciousness (deep relaxation, dreams, hypnosis, ganzfeld) they are better able to access different frequencies of the Zero Point Field (McTaggart, 2008). Similar studies showed that brain waves and hemispheric electrical activity of two people can become synchronised on EEG readings when the subjects relax together and share an interpersonal connection. These studies also showed the principle of coherence, in that the most organised or cohesive brain waves influenced the less-organised brain waves of the partner (McTaggart, 2008). All of these studies seem to show that the person in need is more likely to be influenced by the more organised partner, which imparts a different type of responsibility for the nurse-patient relationship, in that the nurse's self-care becomes even more important than previously thought.
Reference
McTaggart, L. (2008). The field: The quest for the secret force of the universe. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
