Interesting theory! Here are a few questions. If consciousness is separate from the body/brain system, what is a made of? Energy? Does consciousness survive bodily death? I have done research on awareness during unconsciousness. There's evidence that individuals, even some pronounced dead, can be aware of their surroundings. My book, In a World of their own experiencing unconsciousness contain interviews with 111 people might enhance your ideas along with my article with Ken Ring, Further evidence for veridical perception during near-death experiences.

Madelaine Lawrence Thank you for your thoughtful response. Can you please provide me the full name of the book and article?

Now, to address your questions:

In my view, consciousness exists as a phenomenon distinct from the brain and body systems. It may emerge as a byproduct of the intricate interplay between electrons, the brain, and the body. This interaction is akin to the way sparks arise when two objects collide. These 'sparks' are continuously generated as the brain and body operate, particularly through their subconscious processes, which constantly evaluate the environment and work to maintain equilibrium. Understanding consciousness requires acknowledging the complexity of how the brain's components and bodily systems collectively contribute to this phenomenon. While I describe these 'sparks' as consciousness itself, I recognize this interpretation as a personal perspective, rather than an absolute truth.

Although the brain and body produce these sparks of consciousness, their relationship to consciousness can be likened to humanity's connection to the Earth's energies. Just as Earth generates the conditions that allow for human existence without being conscious of us, consciousness might similarly be a byproduct of the brain and body's dynamic interactions, existing independently of their direct awareness.

Regarding whether consciousness persists beyond bodily death, I believe it depends on the continuation of the brain-body connection that generates these 'sparks.' For example, individuals on life support may be biologically alive but lack conscious awareness because their brain and body can no longer produce the necessary sparks. Once this connection is irreversibly severed, consciousness, as we understand it, ceases to exist.

• I've attached one article that gives an overview of my research of unconscious patients. Here's the other list:

Ring, K. & Lawrence, M. (1993). Veridical Perceptions During Near-Death Experiences, Journal of Near-Death Studies, 7, 107-120.

Lawrence, M., (1997). In a World of Their Own; Experiencing Unconsciousness, Westport, CT.: Greenwood Publishing Group.

Lawrence, M. (2015). The death view revolution: A guide to transpersonal experiences surrounding death. Guilford, England: White Crow Books.

Lawrence, M. (2017). Selective attention during transpersonal experiences surrounding death. International Journal of Transpersonal Research. 9(2), 49-56.

Lawrence, M., Ramirez, R. & Bauer, P. (2023). Communicating with Unconscious Patients: An Overview. Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing. 42(1), 3-11.

Here are some thoughts based on my research. I totally agree that consciousness seems to exist separate from the body systems. There are some variations. With patients who are physically unconscious, movement seems to trigger awareness. In hospitals that particularly prominent when being moved from the bed to a stretcher. I had on patient when moved out of a helicopter that landed on the roof of a hospital and was out of her body saw a red shoe on that roof. A resident went up and came down with the shoe. One thing that might help you is the beginning use of EEG detection with unconscious patients now. There's some information about that in my 2023 article. Good luck with all this. I'll see if I can find you email on the University website and send you my info!

Für das Verhältnis zwischen Bewusstsein und Körper ist die Frage nach dem Begriff des Physischen interessant. Der kartesianische (oder dualistische) Begriff des Physischen fasst das Physische als absolut nicht-bewusst auf. Mit diesem Begriff ist es problematisch, das Bewusstsein auf Physisches zu reduzieren. Denn was absolut nicht-bewusst ist (also auch keine rudimentäre Vorform des Bewusstseins, oder eine Fähigkeit zur Bewusstwerdung hat), kann kein Bewusstsein von sich geben. Durchdenkt man das Verhältnis zwischen Bewusstsein und Körper auf der Grundlage dieses Begriffs, ist die unabhängige Existenz des Bewusstseins vom Körper plausibler als die gegenteilige Auffassung. Dieser Begriff des Physischen würde deine Theorie also stützen.

Aber: Man kann das Physische auch auf eine akartesianische Art denken. Hierbei ist die radikale Trennung zwischen Bewusstsein und Physischem aufgehoben. Das heisst, Bewusstsein wird hier bspw. als eine dem Physischen innewohnende Eigenschaft gedacht. Mittels dieses Begriffs kann das Bewusstsein auf Physisches reduziert werden, denn im Physischen ist Bewusstsein laut diesem Begriff nicht absolut abwesend. Hier wäre Bewusstsein also vom Physischen abhängig.

Für deine Theorie könnte diese Überlegung zum Grundbegriff des Physischen relevant sein, weil der akartesianische Begriff zu einer alternativen Theorie führt. Laut meiner Sicht ist es vorteilhaft, wenn sie beide Begriffe in ihre Theorie integrieren würden. Denn beide Begriffe sind logisch möglich, und keiner der Begriffe weist einen logischen Zwang auf. Das heisst, man kann Bewusstsein als komplett unabhängig vom Physischen denken (so wie bspw. im Substanzdualismus), aber man kann es auch als dem Physischen gegenüber immanent verstehen so wie im Panpsychismus. Beide Begriffe enthalten keinen Selbstwiderspruch wie bspw. im Satz "Kreise sind viereckig". Wenn beides logisch möglich ist, dann ist es möglich, dass es verschiedene Arten von Bewusstsein gibt, solches das dem Physischen innewohnt und solches das unabhängig von ihm existiert.

Consciousness is quite clearly not independent of the brain-body system, being thoroughly integrated with it. But consciousness is also not reducible to the brain-body system. This is compellingly testified to by the existence of mental telepathy. The only known mechanism that can account for the features of mental telepathy is quantum entanglement, by means of which a sustained connection between two brains at a distance may be maintained. So the content of one consciousness can rise to the level of awareness in another consciousness at distance in recognizable form that can be readily articulated. This nicely separates the variables, and has obvious implications for the role of quantum entanglement as an essential element of consciousness, one that can readily give the appearance of ethereal independence from the neural dance.

Siegfried Othmer Thank you for sharing your perspective—I appreciate the opportunity to explore different viewpoints on this fascinating subject. From your response, I identified five key themes, each raising important questions that I’d like to delve into further. I hope these questions inspire a rich discussion:

1. Integration of Consciousness with the Brain-Body System

If the brain-body system operates so extensively without conscious involvement (e.g., reflexes, digestion, and stress responses), wouldn’t this suggest that consciousness acts more as an observer than as an integrative element? How does this align with your claim that consciousness is thoroughly integrated with the brain-body system?

2. Irreducibility of Consciousness

How can consciousness be considered irreducible if emotions and behaviors are shaped by the conscious mind’s interpretation of signals from the brain-body system? Could it be that consciousness is dependent on brain-body signals while still functioning as an emergent property?

3. Mental Telepathy as Evidence

Could what you describe as mental telepathy actually be reinterpreted as subconscious communication—through body language, micro expressions, or environmental cues—rather than requiring quantum entanglement? If not, what features distinguish telepathic connections from subconscious or non-verbal communication?

4. Quantum Entanglement as a Mechanism

If mental telepathy relies on quantum entanglement, how do we reconcile this with the fact that many bodily processes are governed by biochemical mechanisms that don’t involve non-local quantum effects? Are there specific studies or findings that demonstrate quantum entanglement facilitating brain-to-brain communication?

5. Appearance of Independence

Could the “ethereal independence” you mention actually arise from the brain’s subconscious processes, which operate beyond conscious awareness, rather than from quantum entanglement? How might quantum entanglement explain this perceived independence more effectively than existing neuroscience models?

Consciousness is body and brain at the same time. There are no two sides of "something". Consciousness is just a tool usefull for performing degree regulations of attention. What is not needed to make it conscious remains un - conscious for whatever reason in a given situation.

The soul is the body and the body is the soul. Just went away from Cartesianisms.

Christoph Rothenbühler Thank you for your insightful post. Your recommendations are highly valuable, and I deeply appreciate the thoughtfulness and depth of your response. It is a testament to the boundless nature of knowledge and wisdom, which transcend conditions and limitations, with free will standing as the ultimate guiding force.

I recognize the importance of delving deeper into the Dualistic (Cartesian) and Non-Dualistic (A-Cartesian) concepts of the physical to fully grasp their foundational principles. There is indeed a beauty in exploring these perspectives.

Once again, thank you for your thoughtful and meaningful contribution.

Madelaine Lawrence

The example of a patient who, during an out-of-body experience, accurately described a red shoe on the roof of a hospital draws parallels to the phenomenon of tapping into the subconscious, where abstract perceptions can arise, such as imagining patterns or shapes when gazing at the sky. However, what sets this case apart is the verification of the described object’s existence.

Advances in EEG detection, I believe, hold significant promise in this field. With emerging technologies, there is potential for groundbreaking progress in quantifying and identifying the internal energy mechanisms of the brain, particularly how it transmits signals to the body under different simulated environments.

Thank you again for your response. It is much appreciated. I have compiled the list of books and articles you provided and look forward to sharing my reflections to further contribute to this stimulating discussion.

Madelaine Lawrence While reviewing the document, I had several questions and observations:

1. Of the 100 hospital patients, only 27 reported unconscious experiences that fit the definition provided by Plum and Posner. These patients typically reported being at home or work when passing out and later waking up in the hospital.

Were these patients tested for drugs, including substances affecting sleep? For example, medications like Ambien are known to cause similar reactions, such as memory lapses and blackouts. In one notable case, a student reportedly consumed 4–5 doses, experienced blackouts, and later described similar episodes upon regaining consciousness.

2. Regarding anesthetic use or diagnostic imaging during these events:

Did the study consider MRI scans of the brain at multiple stages—such as during intake, after the accident occurred, and following the patients’ regaining consciousness.

For patients unconscious due to trauma (e.g., car accidents), were MRI scans conducted at intake and post-recovery to identify changes in brain regions?

3. Concerning the description of a transition between unconsciousness and wakefulness:

The statement, “I tried to say, ‘No, you’re not,’ because I could think and hear, but I couldn’t move, talk, or open my eyes,” resembles experiences reported during transitions between sleep stages.

Is it possible that some of these episodes relate to phenomena like sleep paralysis, where individuals are aware but unable to physically respond?

4. Distorted consciousness:

Four patients experienced illusory phenomena, such as perceiving real external stimuli as harmful. For instance, some believed they were being held against their will or experimented on.

Were blood tests or heart rate analyses conducted after these episodes to check for physiological markers, such as adrenaline spikes? Could hypertension or stress-related responses have contributed to their perception of threat, invoking a fight-or-flight response?

5. Memory distortion:

Patients with head injuries experienced retrograde amnesia, often forgetting activities from 30 minutes to 12 hours before the accident. Others were conscious and communicative with staff but retained no memory of the events.

Could these experiences be comparable to the effects of anesthetics during their onset, where individuals may feel conscious but later have no recollection of events?

6. Near-death experiences:

Patients often reported feelings of euphoria, peace, and an absence of pain or stress, describing the experience as their most wonderful moment.

Is it possible to achieve such a state of mind without associating it with near-death experiences? Could certain dietary or lifestyle practices induce similar feelings of peace and euphoria in a non-life-threatening context?

Thank you so much for sharing this document. While others might shy away from the darker or more taboo aspects of human psychology, I, perhaps due to my naturally detached nature, find reading about these topics fascinating. I appreciate the opportunity to explore these phenomena and view them for what they are.

I look forward to your thoughts and any additional insights you may have!

The original work was carried out in the 1990s. What was known about their condition was published in the book along with the patients' descriptions. Since this type of research had not been done before, it was difficult to determine what testing should have been done. There are over 150 citations of the work I did listed on Google Scholar. So some of those authors may have considered conducting some of the testing you are asking about. I can tell you though that any patient with a psychiatric history was not included in the interviews. I hope that helps

Jairo: You ask: "If the brain-body system operates so extensively without conscious involvement (e.g., reflexes, digestion, and stress responses), wouldn’t this suggest that consciousness acts more as an observer than as an integrative element? How does this align with your claim that consciousness is thoroughly integrated with the brain-body system?

Consciousness doesn't act merely as an observer. A yogi once demonstrated his ability to put his heart into a state of atrial flutter just by way of his meditative techniques. Another yogi demonstrated his ability to survive for hours in a sealed refrigerator in which a burning candle had lasted only minutes. He had been able to reduce his heart rate to 3-4 beats per minute and withdrawn peripheral blood flow to the point where blood couldn't be drawn after the experiment.

Apparently the EEG wasn't tracked throughout this experiment. Given the oxygen demand of neuronal firings, there cannot have been enough oxygen to sustain EEG activity for hours. One can only assume that he was sitting there with a flat-lined EEG and yet had remained conscious.

Hi Jairo,

You might want to check Eben Alexander's writings if you haven't already. He's a neurosurgeon who writes about his experiences while unconscious. Here's one write up. http://ebenalexander.com/about/my-experience-in-coma/ He als wrote a book on his experiences available on Amazon. He actually says he had no brain function. Good luck! Looking forward to seeing your next theory write up.

Siegfried Othmer When reading your post about the yogi’s extraordinary ability to regulate his heart rate and bodily functions, the concept of Attachment Theory, as developed by John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth, immediately came to mind. Attachment Theory focuses heavily on emotional regulation and self-regulation, particularly in how individuals manage their physiological and psychological responses.

Yet in Attachment Theory the emphasis falls on the issue of pre-verbal trauma, which is necessarily physiologically encoded in a manner that is not readily accessible to volitional alteration or control. This makes resolving the adverse sequelae of early trauma so problematic. The trauma response is entirely appropriate to the lived experience, making it inherently resistant to resolution.

Siegfried Othmer Could you provide me with the research or article regarding a yogi who demonstrated his ability to induce atrial flutter in his heart through meditation techniques? Additionally, I am interested in the account of another yogi who was able to survive for hours in a sealed refrigerator, where a burning candle lasted only minutes.

Siegfried Othmer I am critical of Attachment Theory's distinction between trauma-induced responses and those arising from inherent conditions. In my view, both involve automatic and difficult-to-control physiological reactions, such as altered cortisol levels and heart rate. The internal responses triggered by trauma are strikingly similar to those associated with inherent health disorders, suggesting that the physiological mechanisms at play are not fundamentally different.