Dr. Theresa Bullard

Like it just, it's so parallels, you know, these physicists are talking about things that really parallel

ancient mysticism and and what the mystics would all say is that you know it's all one and there's these higher dimensional realities and here what we experience in the physical is just the final step of a manifestation process but there's all these higher planes of creation that we can explore

ancient mysticism and and what the mystics would all say is that you know it's all one and there's these higher dimensional realities and here what we experience in the physical is just the final step of a manifestation process but there's all these higher planes of creation that we can explore

ancient mysticism and and what the mystics would all say is that you know it's all one and there's these higher dimensional realities and here what we experience in the physical is just the final step of a manifestation process but there's all these higher planes of creation that we can explore

So the implicate order, there's the explicate order, which is kind of the what you see is what you get. It's like the surface physical level of things.

So the implicate order, there's the explicate order, which is kind of the what you see is what you get. It's like the surface physical level of things.

So the implicate order, there's the explicate order, which is kind of the what you see is what you get. It's like the surface physical level of things.

External manifestations, the 3D physical reality that we can observe and experience with our senses and so forth. The implicate order is a deeper reality that is underneath all of that. And he used an example of like, let's say you have a big vat of some, you know, substance, you know, fluid, like, or a clay of some kind, and you can observe, you know, with a, with a

External manifestations, the 3D physical reality that we can observe and experience with our senses and so forth. The implicate order is a deeper reality that is underneath all of that. And he used an example of like, let's say you have a big vat of some, you know, substance, you know, fluid, like, or a clay of some kind, and you can observe, you know, with a, with a

External manifestations, the 3D physical reality that we can observe and experience with our senses and so forth. The implicate order is a deeper reality that is underneath all of that. And he used an example of like, let's say you have a big vat of some, you know, substance, you know, fluid, like, or a clay of some kind, and you can observe, you know, with a, with a

camera let's say you can observe what's happening on the surface but you don't necessarily see what's going on underneath it especially if it's opaque and you might put a drop of some dye you know but there's this movement that's happening throughout and underneath it and you might see a little trail of what it's doing on the surface but you have no clue what's happening underneath

camera let's say you can observe what's happening on the surface but you don't necessarily see what's going on underneath it especially if it's opaque and you might put a drop of some dye you know but there's this movement that's happening throughout and underneath it and you might see a little trail of what it's doing on the surface but you have no clue what's happening underneath

camera let's say you can observe what's happening on the surface but you don't necessarily see what's going on underneath it especially if it's opaque and you might put a drop of some dye you know but there's this movement that's happening throughout and underneath it and you might see a little trail of what it's doing on the surface but you have no clue what's happening underneath

And that's one analogy that he used for the implicate order is that deeper reality, the more whole picture versus the explicate being just what's on the surface and what's observable. And so he kind of compared...

And that's one analogy that he used for the implicate order is that deeper reality, the more whole picture versus the explicate being just what's on the surface and what's observable. And so he kind of compared...

And that's one analogy that he used for the implicate order is that deeper reality, the more whole picture versus the explicate being just what's on the surface and what's observable. And so he kind of compared...

the quantum reality to this implicate order, this whole movement where there's a deeper reality to things, whereas the kind of Newtonian way of looking at things is more what we just see on the surface. Another way of looking at that is if you have a higher dimensional object,

the quantum reality to this implicate order, this whole movement where there's a deeper reality to things, whereas the kind of Newtonian way of looking at things is more what we just see on the surface. Another way of looking at that is if you have a higher dimensional object,

the quantum reality to this implicate order, this whole movement where there's a deeper reality to things, whereas the kind of Newtonian way of looking at things is more what we just see on the surface. Another way of looking at that is if you have a higher dimensional object,

let's say, you know, just for the sake of understanding it, let's say we have a cylinder, right, a three-dimensional cylinder. And then you shine a light on that cylinder and it casts a shadow on a screen and you might see a circle. But if you shine a light on that cylinder and it casts a light on another screen, you're going to see a square or a rectangle.