Randall
J. Randall Murphy
Fair enough, Burnt State - I was being too jargony there. Let me break it down more precisely.
When I say "high-coherence frequency bands," I'm drawing from a couple of distinct threads of research.
The biophysics side first: HeartMath Institute research shows that emotional and attentional states correlate with measurable electromagnetic coherence patterns - not just neurologically but in the body's overall bioelectric field. "High coherence" means synchronized, ordered electromagnetic activity rather than the chaotic baseline most of us operate in by default. This is reproducible in lab settings and not really controversial in that specific, narrow sense.
From the contact research angle: Kenneth Ring's work with experiencers found significantly altered electromagnetic sensitivity following close encounters. Vallee has also noted that UAP phenomena tend to concentrate around areas and moments of electromagnetic anomaly. The question I was raising - and I'll own that it was speculative - is whether this correlation is incidental or something more directional.
What I meant more precisely: if contact or perception of NHI correlates with specific coherent states (theta brainwaves, high heart coherence, deep meditative states), then a civilization that rarely achieves or sustains those states may simply not be generating the right signal to be perceived - or to perceive. It's less of a moral argument and more of a frequency-matching problem. Like trying to receive a station your radio wasn't calibrated for.
The meme was well-placed, by the way. Fair cop on calling out the jargon.
That's all very interesting from a sci-fi technobabble perspective — and you still haven't answered my previous question: Why don't the aliens simply transmit on frequencies we can detect? They have antigravity — but haven't learned how to make two-way radios? And BTW — all the claims and theories on the Star Embassy site that have an "interdimensional" component are either impossible or aren't actually "interdimensional" phenomena. That doesn't necessarily mean that verifiable accounts of such phenomena aren't real. It just means that we need a better explanation.
Last edited:
