Insight into Cellular "Consciousness"
Dr. Bruce H. Lipton, Ph.D. © 2001

Reprinted from Bridges, 2001 Vol 12(1):5
ISSEEM (303) 425-4625

Though a human is comprised of over fifty trillion cells, there are no physiologic functions in our bodies that were not already pre-existing in the biology of the single, nucleated (eukaryotic) cell. Single-celled organisms, such as the amoeba or paramecium, possess the cytological equivalents of a digestive system, an excretory system, a respiratory system, a musculoskeletal system, an immune system, a reproductive system and a cardiovascular system, among others. In the humans, these physiologic functions are associated with the activity of specific organs. These same physiologic processes are carried out in cells by diminutive organ systems called organelles.

Cellular life is sustained by tightly regulating the functions of the cell’s physiologic systems. The expression of predictable behavioral repertoires implies the existence of a cellular "nervous system." This system reacts to environmental stimuli by eliciting appropriate behavioral responses. The organelle that coordinates the adjustments and reactions of a cell to its internal and external environments would represent the cytoplasmic equivalent of the "brain."

Since the breaking of the genetic code in the early 1950's, cell biologists have favored the concept of genetic determinism, the notion that genes "control" biology. Virtually all of the cell’s genes are contained within the cell’s largest organelle, the nucleus. Conventional opinion considers the nucleus to be the "command center" of the cell. As such, the nucleus would represent the cellular equivalent of the "brain."

Genetic determinism infers that the expression and fate of an organism are primarily "predetermined" in its genetic code. The genetic basis of organismal expression is ingrained in the biological sciences as a consensual truth, a belief by which we frame our reference for health and disease. Hence the notion that susceptibility to certain illnesses or the expression of aberrant behavior is generally linked to genetic lineage and, on occasions, spontaneous mutations. By extension, it is also perceived by a majority of scientists that the human mind and consciousness are "encoded" in the molecules of the nervous system. This in turn promotes the concept that the emergence of consciousness reflects the "ghost in the machine."

The primacy of DNA in influencing and regulating biological behavior and evolution is based upon an unfounded assumption. A seminal article by H. F. Nijhout (BioEssays 1990, 12 (9):441-446) describes how concepts concerning genetic "controls" and "programs" were originally conceived as metaphors to help define and direct avenues of research. Widespread repetition of this compelling hypothesis over fifty years has resulted in the "metaphor of the model" becoming the "truth of the mechanism," in spite of the absence of substantiative supporting evidence. Since the assumption emphasizes the genetic program as the "top rung" on the biological control ladder, genes have acquired the status of causal agents in eliciting biological expression and behavior (e.g., genes causing cancer, alcoholism, even criminality).

The notion that the nucleus and its genes are the "brain" of the cell is an untenable and illogical hypothesis. If the brain is removed from an animal, disruption of physiologic integration would immediately lead to the organism's death. If the nucleus truly represented the brain of the cell, then removal of the nucleus would result in the cessation of cell functions and immediate cell death. However, experimentally enucleated cells may survive for two or more months with out genes, and yet are capable of effecting complex responses to environmental and cytoplasmic stimuli (Lipton, et al., Differentiation 1991, 46:117-133). Logic reveals that the nucleus can not be the brain of the cell!

Studies on cloned human cells led me to the awareness that the cell’s plasmalemma, commonly referred to as the cell membrane, represents the cell’s "brain." Cell membranes, the first biological organelle to appear in evolution, are the only organelle common to every living organism. Cell membranes compartmentalize the cytoplasm, separating it from the vagaries of the external environment. In its barrier capacity, the membrane enables the cell to maintain tight "control" over the cytoplasmic environment, a necessity in carrying out biological reactions. Cell membranes are so thin that they can only be observed using the electron microscope. Consequently, the existence and universal expression of the membrane structure was only clearly established around 1950.

In electron micrographs, the cell membrane appears as a vanishingly thin (<10nm), tri-layered (black-white-black) "skin" enveloping the cell. The fundamental structural simplicity of the cell membrane, which is identical for all biological organisms, beguiled cell biologists. For most of the last fifty years, the membrane was perceived as a "passive," semi-permeable barrier, resembling a breathable "plastic wrap," whose function was to simply contain the cytoplasm.

The membrane’s layered appearance reflects the organization of its phospholipid building blocks. These lollipop-shaped molecules are amphipathic, they possess both a globular polar phosphate head (Figure A) and two stick-like non-polar legs (Figure B). When shaken in solution, the phospholipids self-assemble into a stabilizing crystalline bilayer (Figure C).

The lipid legs comprising the core of the membrane provide a hydrophobic barrier (Figure D) that partitions the cytoplasm from the ever-changing external environment. While cytoplasmic integrity is maintained by the lipid’s passive barrier function, life processes necessitate the active exchange of metabolites and information between the cytoplasm and surrounding environment. The physiologic activities of the plasmalemma are mediated by the membrane’s proteins .

Each of the approximately 100,000 different proteins providing for the human body is comprised of a linear chain of linked amino acids. The "chains" are assembled from a population of twenty different amino acids. Each protein’s unique structure and function is defined by the specific sequence of amino acids comprising its chain. Synthesized as a linear string, the amino acid chains subsequently fold into unique three dimensional globules. The final conformation (shape) of the protein reflects a balance of electrical charges among its constituent amino acids.

The three dimensional morphology of folded proteins endows their surfaces with specifically shaped clefts and pockets. Molecules and ions possessing complementary physical shapes and electrical charges will bind to a protein’s surface clefts and pockets with the specificity of a lock-and-key. Binding of another molecule alters the protein’s electrical charge distribution. In response, the protein’s amino acid chain will spontaneously refold to rebalance the charge distribution. Refolding changes the protein’s conformation. In shifting from one conformation to the next, the protein expresses movement. Protein conformational movements are harnessed by the cell to carry out physiologic functions. The work generated by protein movement is responsible for "life."

A number of the twenty amino acids comprising the protein’s chain are non-polar (hydrophobic, oil-loving). The hydrophobic portions of proteins seek stability by inserting themselves into the membrane’s lipid core. The polar (water-loving) portions of these proteins extend from either or both of the membrane’s water-covered surfaces. Proteins incorporated within the membrane are called integral membrane proteins (IMPs).

Membrane IMPs can be functionally subdivided into two classes: receptors and effectors. Receptors are input devices that respond to environmental signals. Effectors are output devices that activate cellular processes. A family of processor proteins, located in the cytoplasm beneath the membrane, serve to link signal-receiving receptors with action-producing effectors.

Receptors are molecular "antennas" that recognize environmental signals. Some receptor antennas extend inward from the membrane’s cytoplasmic face. These receptors "read" the internal milieu and provide awareness of cytoplasmic conditions. Other receptors extending from the cell’s outer surface provide awareness of external environmental signals.

Conventional biomedical sciences hold that environmental "information" can only be carried by the substance of molecules (Science 1999, 284:79-109). According to this notion, receptors only recognize "signals" that physically complement their surface features. This materialistic belief is maintained even though it has been amply demonstrated that protein receptors respond to vibrational frequencies. Through a process known as electroconformational coupling (Tsong, Trends in Biochem. Sci. 1989, 14:89-92), resonant vibrational energy fields can alter the balance of charges in a protein. In a harmonic energy field, receptors will change their conformation. Consequently, membrane receptors respond to both physical and energetic environmental information.

A receptor’s "activated" conformation informs the cell of a signal’s existence. Changes in receptor conformation provide for cellular "awareness." In its "activated" conformation, a signal-receiving receptor may bind to either a specific function-producing effector protein or to intermediary processor protein. Receptor proteins return to their original "inactive" conformation and detach from other proteins when the signal ceases.

The family of effector proteins represent "output" devices. There are three different types of effectors, transport proteins, enzymes and cytoskeletal proteins. Transporters, which include the extensive family of channels, serve to transport molecules and information from one side of the membrane barrier to the other. Enzymes are responsible for metabolic synthesis and degradation. Cytoskeletal proteins regulate the shape and motility of cells.

Effector proteins generally possess two conformations: an active configuration in which the protein expresses its function; and a "resting" conformation in which the protein is inactive. For example, a channel protein in its active conformation possesses an open pore through which specific ions or molecules traverse the membrane barrier. In returning to an inactive conformation, protein refolding constricts the conducting channel and the flow of ions or molecules ceases.

Putting all the pieces together we are provide with insight as to how the cell’s "brain" processes information and elicits behavior. The innumerable molecular and radiant energy signals in a cell's environment creates a virtual cacophony of information. In a manner resembling a biological Fourier transform, individual surface receptors (Fig. H) sense the apparently chaotic environment and filter out specific frequencies as behavioral signals. Receipt of a resonant signal (Fig. I, arrow) induces a conformational change in the cytoplasmic portion of the receptor (Fig. I, arrowhead). This conformational change enables the receptor to complex with a specific effector IMP (Fig. J, in this case a channel IMP). Binding of the receptor protein (Fig. K) in turn elicits a conformational change in the effector protein (Fig. L, channel opens). Activated receptors can turn on enzyme pathways, induce structural reorganization and motility or activate transport of uniquely pulsed electrical signals and ions across the membrane.

Processor proteins serve as "multiplex" devices in that they can increase the versatility of the signal system. Such proteins interface receptors with effector proteins (P in figure M). By "programming" processor protein coupling, a variety of inputs can be linked with a variety of outputs. Processor proteins provide for a large behavioral repertoire using a limited number of IMPs.

Effector IMPs convert receptor-mediated environmental signals into biological behavior. The output function of some effector proteins might represent the full extent of an elicited behavior. However, in most cases, the output of effector IMPs actually serve as a secondary "signal" which penetrates the cell and activates behavior of other cytoplasmic protein pathways. Activated effector proteins also serve as transcription factors, signals that elicit gene expression.

The behavior of the cell is controlled by the combined actions of coupled receptors and effector IMPs. Receptors provide "awareness of the environment" and effector proteins convert that awareness into "physical sensation." By strict definition, a receptor-effector complex represents a fundamental unit of perception. Protein perception units provide the foundation of biological consciousness. Perceptions "control" cell behavior, though in truth, a cell is actually "controlled" by beliefs, since perceptions may not necessarily be accurate.

The cell membrane is an organic information processor. It senses the environment and converts that awareness into "information" that can influence the activity of protein pathways and control the expression of the genes. A description of the membrane’s structure and function reads as follows: (A) based upon the organization of its phospholipid molecules, the membrane is a liquid crystal; B) the regulated transport of information across the hydrophobic barrier by IMP effector proteins renders the membrane a semiconductor; and (C) the membrane is endowed with IMPs that function as gates (receptors) and channels. As a liquid crystal semiconductor with gates and channels, the membrane is an information processing transistor, an organic computer chip.

Each receptor-effector complex represents a biological BIT, a single unit of perception. Though this hypothesis was first formally presented in 1986 (Lipton 1986, Planetary Assoc. for Clean Energy Newsletter 5:4), the concept has since been technologically verified. Cornell and others (Nature 1997, 387:580-584), linked a membrane to a gold foil substrate. By controlling the electrolytes between the membrane and the foil, they were able to digitize the opening and closing of receptor-activated channels. The cell and a chip are homologous structures.

The cell is a carbon-based "computer chip" that reads the environment. Its "keyboard" is comprised of receptors. Environmental information is entered via its protein "keys." The data is transduced into biological behavior by effector proteins. The IMP BITs serve as switches that regulate cell functions and gene expression. The nucleus represents a "hard disk" with DNA-coded software. Recent advances in molecular biology emphasize the read/write nature of this hard drive.

Interestingly, the thickness of the membrane (about 7.5 nm) is fixed by the dimensions of the phospholipid bilayer. Since membrane IMPs are approximately 6-8 nm in diameter, they can only form a monolayer in the membrane. IMP units can not stack upon one another, the addition of more perception units is directly linked to an increase in membrane surface area. By this understanding, evolution, the expansion of awareness (i.e., the addition of more IMPs) would most effectively be modeled using fractal geometry. The fractal nature of biology can be observed in the structural and functional reiterations observed among the hierarchy of the cell, multicellular organisms (man) and the communities of multicellular organisms (human society).

This new perception on cell control mechanisms frees us from the limitations of genetic determinism. Rather than behaving as programmed genetic automatons, biological behavior is dynamically linked to the environment. Though this reductionist approach has highlighted the mechanism of the individual perception proteins, an understanding of the processing mechanism emphasizes the holistic nature of biological organisms. The expression of the cell reflects the recognition of all perceived environmental stimuli, both physical and energetic. Consequently, the "Heart of Energy Medicine" may truly be found in the magic of the membrane.

References and Notes

1. H. F. Nijhout, BioEssays, 12(9) (John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY,1990) pp.441-446

2. B. H. Lipton, et al., Differentiation, 46(Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, FRG, 1991) pp.117-133

3. N. Williams, Science, 277 (AAAS, Washington, DC 1997) pp476-477

4. T. Y. Tsong, Trends in Biochemical Sciences 14 (Elsevier, West Sussex, UK 1989) pp. 89-92

5. B. H. Lipton, Planetary Association for Clean Energy Newsletter, 5 (Planetary Association for Clean Energy, Hull, Quebec, 1986) pg. 4

6. B. A. Cornell, et al. Nature 387 (Nature Publishing Group, London, UK,1997) pp. 580-584

The Human Genome Project:
A Cosmic Joke that has the Scientists Rolling in the Aisle

Dr. Bruce H. Lipton, Ph.D. © 2001

There is a "thing" I refer to as Universe Humor, others may refer to it as a Cosmic Joke. There have been times in all of our lives when we thought we knew exactly how some event or incident was going to turn out. We could be so convinced that we "knew" what was going to happen, that we would have bet the family farm and the kitchen sink on the outcome of the event. It is at moments like this, when the Universe surprises us by taking a left turn instead of a right.

While in most cases such a turn of events may evoke anger, disappointment or disillusion, I usually respond by shaking my head in profound awe of the perverse nature of Universe Humor. Here I thought I knew exactly how things would turn out and then find myself surprised, the wind knocked out of me. In wonder, I must rethink and reconsider the beliefs I held that led me to my faulty conclusion.

When Universe Humor hits an individual, recognition of their astonishing lack of awareness may provoke a profound change in their life. On an individual level, each must reconsider their own beliefs in order to accommodate the surprising observations.

In contrast, the course of human history is radically altered when Universe Humor undermines a "core belief" that is part of the fabric of the entire society. Consider how the course of human history changed when the belief that the world was flat was challenged by the circumnavigation of the globe?

In 1893, the chairman of physics at Harvard University warned students that there was no more need for additional PhD's in the field of physics. He boasted that science had established the fact that the universe was a matter machine, comprised of physical, indivisible atoms that fully obeyed the laws of Newtonian Mechanics. Since all the descriptive laws of physics were "known," the future of physics would be relegated to making finer and finer measurements.

Two years later, the Newtonian concept of a matter-only universe was toppled by the discovery of subatomic particles, X-rays and radioactivity. Within ten years, physicists had to discard their fundamental belief in a material universe for it was recognized that the universe was actually made of energy whose mechanics obeyed the laws of Quantum Physics. That little piece of Universe Humor profoundly altered the course of civilization, taking us from steam engines to rocket ships, from telegraphs to computers.

Well…the cosmic prankster has struck again!

As it has done a few times in the past, this expression of Universe Humor upends a foundational basic belief held by conventional science. The joke is embodied in the results of The Human Genome Project. In all the hoopla over the sequencing of the human genetic code and being got caught up in the brilliant technological feat, we have not focused on the actual "meaning" of the results.

One of the most important and fundamental core beliefs in conventional biology is that the traits and character of organisms are "controlled" by their genes. This belief is couched in the concept of genetic determinacy, the conventional dogma provided in virtually every textbook and biology course. How do genes manage to "control" life? It is based upon the concept that genes are self-emergent, meaning that they are able to "turn themselves on and off." Self-actualizing genes would provide for computer-like programs that would control organismal structure and function. Accordingly, our belief in genetic determinacy implies that "complexity" (evolutionary stature) of an organism would be proportional to the number of genes it possessed.

Before the Human genome Project was underway, scientists had estimated that human complexity would necessitate a genome in excess of 100,000 genes. Genes are primarily blueprints encoding the chemical structure of proteins, the molecular "parts" that comprise the cell. It was thought that there was one gene to code for each of the 70,000 to 90,000 proteins that make up our bodies.

In addition to protein-coding genes, the cell contains genes that determine the character of an organism by "controlling" the activity of other genes. Genes that "program" the expression of other genes are called regulatory genes. Regulatory genes encode information about complex physical patterns that provide for specific anatomies, which represent the structures that characterize each cell type (muscle versus bone) or organism (a chimp from a human). In addition, a subset of regulatory genes is associated with the "control" of specific behavioral patterns. Regulatory genes orchestrate the activity of a large numbers genes whose actions collectively contribute to the expression of such traits as awareness, emotion, and intelligence. It was estimated that there were more than 30,000 regulatory genes in the human genome.

In considering the minimal number of genes needed to make a human: we would start with a base number of over 70,000 genes, one for each of the over 70,000 proteins found in a human. Then we include the number of regulatory genes needed to provide for the complexity of patterns expressed in our anatomy, physiology and behavior. Lets round-off the number of human genes to a total of an even 100,000, by including a minimalist number of 30,000 regulatory genes.

Ready for the Cosmic Joke? The results of the Genome project reveal that there are only about 34,000 genes in the human genome. Two thirds of the anticipated genes do not exist! How can we account for the complexity of a genetically-controlled human when there are not even enough genes to code just for the proteins?

More humiliating to the dogma of our belief in genetic determinacy is the fact that there is not much difference in the total number of genes found in humans and those found in primitive organisms populating the planet. Recently, biologists completed mapping the genomes of two of the most studied animal models in genetic research, the fruit fly and a microscopic roundworm (Caenorhabditis elegans).

The primitive Caenorhabditis worm serves as a perfect model to study the role of genes in development and behavior. This rapidly growing and reproducing primitive organism has a precisely patterned body comprised of exactly 969 cells, a simple brain of about 302 ordered cells, it expresses a unique repertoire of behaviors, and most importantly, it is amenable to genetic experimentation. The Caenorhabditis genome is comprised of over 18,000 genes. The 50+ trillion-celled human body has a genome with only 15,000 more genes than the lowly, spineless, microscopic roundworm.

Obviously, the complexity of organisms is not reflected in the complexity of its genes. For example the fruit fly genome was recently defined to consist of 13,000 genes. The eye of the fruit fly is comprised of more cells than are found in the entire Caenorhabditis worm. Profoundly more complex in structure and behavior than the microscopic roundworm, the fruit fly has 5000 fewer genes!!

The Human Genome Project was a global effort dedicated to deciphering the human genetic code. It was thought the completed human blueprint would provide science with all the necessary information to "cure" all of mankind's ills. It was further assumed that an awareness of the human genetic code mechanism would enable scientists to create a Mozart or another Einstein.

The "failure" of the genome results to conform to our expectations reveals that our expectations of how biology "works" are clearly based upon incorrect assumptions or information. Our "belief" in the concept of genetic determinism is fundamentally…flawed! We can not truly attribute the character of our lives to be the consequence of genetic "programming." The genome results force us to reconsider the question: "From whence do we acquire our biological complexity?"

In a commentary on the surprising results of the Human Genome study, David Baltimore, one of the world's most prominent geneticists and Nobel prize winner, addressed this issue of complexity:

"But unless the human genome contains a lot of genes that are opaque to our computers, it is clear that we do not gain our undoubted complexity over worms and plants by using more genes. Understanding what does give us our complexity-our enormous behavioral repertoire, ability to produce conscious action, remarkable physical coordination, precisely tuned alterations in response to external variations of the environment, learning, memory…need I go on?-remains a challenge for the future." (Nature 409:816, 2001)

Scientists have continuously touted that our biological fates are written in our genes. In the face of that belief, the Universe humors us with a cosmic joke: The "control" of life is not in the genes. Of course the most interesting consequence of the project's results is that we must now face that "challenge for the future" Baltimore alluded to. What does "control" our biology, if not the genes?

Over the last number of years, science and the press' emphasis on the "power" of genes has overshadowed the brilliant work of many biologists that reveal a radically different understanding concerning organismal expression. Emerging at the cutting edge of cell science is the recognition that the environment, and more specifically, our perception of the environment, directly controls our behavior and gene activity.

The molecular mechanisms by which animals, from single cells to humans, respond to environmental stimuli and activate appropriate physiological and behavioral responses have recently been identified. Cells utilize these mechanisms in order to dynamically "adapt" their structure and function to accommodate ever-changing environmental demands. The process of adaptation is mediated by the cell membrane (the skin of the cell), which serves as the equivalent of the cell's "brain." Cell membranes recognize environmental "signals" through the activity of receptor proteins. Receptors recognize both physical (e.g., chemicals, ions) and energetic (e.g., electromagnetic, scalar forces) signals.

Environmental signals "activate" receptor proteins causing them to bind with complementary effector proteins. Effector proteins are "switches" that control the cell's behavior. Receptor-effector proteins provide the cell with awareness through physical sensation. By strict definition, these membrane protein complexes represent molecular units of perception. These membrane perception molecules also control gene transcription (the turning on and off of gene programs) and have recently been linked to adaptive mutations (genetic alterations that rewrite the DNA code in response to stress).

The cell membrane is a structural and functional homologue (equivalent) of a computer chip, while the nucleus represents a read-write hard disk loaded with genetic programs. Organismal evolution, resulting from increasing the number of membrane perception units, would be modeled using fractal geometry. Reiterated fractal patterns enable a cross-referencing of structure and function among three levels of biological organization: the cell, the multicellular organism and societal evolution. Through fractal mathematics we are provided with valuable insight into the past and future of evolution.

The environment, through the act of perception, controls behavior, gene activity and even the rewriting of the genetic code. Cells "learn" (evolve) by creating new perception proteins in response to novel environmental experiences. "Learned" perceptions, especially those derived from indirect experiences (e.g., parental, peer and academic education), may be based upon incorrect information or faulty interpretations. Since they may or may not be "true," perceptions are in reality-beliefs!

Our new scientific knowledge is returning to an ancient awareness of the power of belief. Beliefs are indeed powerful…whether they are true or false. While we have always heard of the "power of positive thinking," the problem is negative thinking is just as powerful, though in the "opposite" direction. Problems encountered in health and in the unfolding of our lives are generally connected to the "misperceptions" acquired in our learning experiences. The wonderful part of the story is that perceptions can be relearned! We can reshape our lives in retraining our consciousness. This is a reflection of the ageless wisdom that has been passed down to us and is now being recognized in cellular biology.

An understanding of the newly described cell-control mechanisms will cause as profound a shift in biological belief as the quantum revolution caused in physics. The strength of the emerging new biological model is that it unifies the basic philosophies of conventional medicine, complementary medicine and spiritual healing.

The creative principle of the mind , which is at the bottom of all form and materiality is recognized as the active side of the Universal Consciousness, on the surface of which forms arise and pass away like the waves on the surface of the ocean; the latter, when stilled, reflects the pure emptiness of space and the pure light of Heaven.

- Lama Govinda, Creative Meditation and Multi-Dimensional Consciousness

Our book section has two recommendations on FLOW which was highlighted in Anne's April notes.

Dick Sutphen talks about FLOW.       (http://www.dicksutphen.com/html)

The majority of people diffuse their attention in hundreds of random ways. Those who flow, focus their attention intentionally upon the task at hand. It really amounts to knowing your goal, concentrating on it, remaining determined, and having the self-discipline to complete what you are doing.

You create yourself by how you invest your energy. When it is under control your attention is focused. Attention is your most important tool in the task of improving the quality of your experience.

1. Choose a task that you have a good chance of completing.

2. You need the ability to focus your concentration upon the task at hand (a list of CDs that will help is listed in the website).

3. Clear goals are necessary, allowing you to focus your concentration.

4. The task provides feedback, which allows you to focus your concentration.

5. You get so involved in the task that you forget about everything else.
6. The task allows you to exercise a sense of control over your actions.
7. You become so focused on the task that self-concern disappears. (Your sense of self returns, stronger than ever after the flow experience is completed.)

8. You lose your sense of time; hours seems to pass in minutes, minutes can stretch out and seem like hours.

The combination of these factors causes a sense of deep enjoyment that is intensely gratifying. With this knowledge, it's possible to achieve control of consciousness and turn even routine tasks into an experience of flow.

Remember, flow is when all your relevant skills are needed to cope with the challenges of a task, and you become completely absorbed by the activity. No attention is left to process any information but what the activity offers.

Those who naturally experience flow appear to have an "autotelic" self. The word is made up of two Greek words meaning "self goal." Most people have goals that are shaped by biological needs and social conventions. In other words, their goals are generated externally. Those with an autotelic self have self-contained goals, and they accept few if any goals from outside themselves. They aren't bored, seldom experience anxiety, and easily translate threats into challenges, thus maintaining inner harmony.

An important aspect of an autotelic self is the development of the self-discipline necessary to sustain your involvement until you accomplish your goal. Finally, you must learn to enjoy the immediate experience -- live in the now while working for the accomplishment of the goal in the future.

Once you are flowing, the experience drives you on to more creativity and achievement. The development of increasingly refined skills to sustain enjoyment is the actual power behind the evolution of culture.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

THOUGHTS CHANGE WATER

"What The Bleep Do We Know?" is a new spiritual film graphically illustrating the interconnectedness of all things. Part documentary, part story, fourteen mystics and scientists are interviewed as a protagonist learns how the fundamental premises in her life are not reality at all.

One short segment of the film is from a study by Masaru Emoto, showing how powerfully your thoughts can affect your physical environment. Emoto's book, "The Message from Water" demonstrates how water will change form in response to thought.

Emoto mentally projected love to a bottle of water, which was then frozen and later the ice crystals were photographed. The crystals were beautiful, clear and symmetrical.

Next, he let the ice in the bottle melt, before directing hate to the water. Again, he froze the water and photographed the ice crystals. The crystals were misshapen, dense and ugly.

At this point in the film, a man looks directly into the camera and says, "If thoughts can do that to water, what can they do to you?"

But here is something the film did not point out. The water than shares this "memory structure," positive or negative, with ALL living things it comes into contact with.

Thoughts can cause water to change form. The molecular structure of water is two atoms of hydrogen and one atom of oxygen. The thought influences the atoms making up the molecule, and the response of the atoms creates the form. The purpose of atoms is to express life in form, and the creative vibration of thought directs the form taken by atoms.

We each experience an inner world made up of beliefs, which have been programmed by our life experiences (including past-life experiences). And these beliefs generate the thoughts and emotions that manifest all our outer experiences. Self change begins with reprogramming our beliefs, which then generate new thoughts and emotions, which in turn, create new experiences.

AGENTS OF CHANGE
Ann
Stamford, Connecticut

I recently experienced a subtle yet poignant reality shift. I work for a temporary agency and have various assignments. Too often I get caught up in perpetuating visions of what's unsatisfying in present reality. When I envision the worst job imaginable, it turns out to be the next job my agent assigns to me. When I envision what I want on the rare occasion that I'm feeling optimistic, that also comes to fruition. It is truly uncanny. I don't know the origin -- it could be creative visualization or a psychic link between my agent and I.

I looked up 'agent' in the dictionary to make sure I was using it correctly, and read there that an agent is: "one who is authorized to act for or in place of someone else." My agent finds me assignments, negotiates my fee, and gives me the details -- so I guess that is the correct term. What took me aback was another definition of agent: "A means or instrument by which a guiding intelligence achieves results." This latter definition rings truer and deeper than the former, to me. There does seem to be a guiding intelligence that gives me my assignments.

The assignments come to me in visualizations and in directions from my agent. I am just beginning to take notice of what comes first. For the last week or two, I had been envisioning some strange and seemingly disparate images. During that time, I had been playing phone tag with my agent, and getting visions of vending machines. I thought I should buy some vending machines to make some income. I tried to envision places where I could write and study, despite having an assignment. My thoughts were that I should write in cafes or at the beach, because I wasn't getting enough done at home. I wanted to get away from my computer, yet I needed some income. For some reason I was envisioning this place I had been before -- it was a sterile place that only an imagination could fill up. I remembered all of this when I was sent there today. I didn't have that weird deja vu feeling, though. I felt like I was supposed to be there.

My assignment was to sit in the cafe seating area, and keep an eye on the vending machines. I had time to write stories, study, and make contacts in the real estate business. All this while getting paid! And, it was the first time I wasn't sitting in front of a computer for an assignment. My point with this story is that we are masters of our universe, somehow. Perhaps there is divine intervention by agents, angels, or other higher powers. No matter -- It is the images that we hold in our minds, the thoughts we have in our heads, and the words that we speak that are harangued into the universe and boomeranged back at us. The universe answers what we envision, think and speak.

Reprinted from RealityShifters News, a free ezine featuring
articles, stories, book reviews and websites for shifting
reality. Subscribe at http://realityshifters.com/ and receive
free gifts when you recommend this web site to your friends.