Welcome to Hug the Universe.

Grab your hat, and let's put the “fun” in profundity.

How Can We Know What to Believe in Such a Confusing World?

How Can We Know What to Believe in Such a Confusing World?

Are you new to Hug the Universe? If so, welcome! This is part 2 of 4 in a series about the hidden determinants of human behavior. If you haven’t read the first post in the series, Why Is the World So Crazy?!, you’ll definitely want to start there. :)

The day science begins to study non-physical phenomena, it will make more progress in one decade than in all the previous centuries of its existence. –Nikola Tesla

There is a lot of conflict in the world, and it only takes the most casual of strolls through history to see that this has been part of humanity’s story for as long as we’ve been writing it. This isn’t surprising considering there are as many beliefs, opinions, and perspectives as there are people on the planet. Person A is absolutely certain they’re perceiving reality, while Person B sees something totally different, and Person C thinks they’re both crazy. 

With all those opinions flying around, how can anyone know what’s true? It’s pretty easy to imagine how the world might change for the better if we had a means to identify truth objectively. 

What would you say if I told you we do have such an ability, but just haven’t recognized it? 

I included that Tesla quote at the beginning of this article because “the day science begins to study non-physical phenomena” has already happened. And through it, a method has been discovered that produces an objective reading of the essence of information in a way that's similar to how a thermometer provides an objective reading of temperature. 

The method is called Coherence Verification.

Let’s chat about physics for a minute

If you’re not particularly excited about things like physics, just bear with me for a moment—I promise this is really relevant. We’re going to cover a lot of information in this post, and I’ve done my best to make it fun and engaging. :)

As mentioned in the first part of this series, David R. Hawkins made a remarkable discovery: thoughts and consciousness do not originate in the physical structures of our brains (as is commonly believed). This is really important because it begs the question, “ok, then where the heck does it originate??”

To better understand how Hawkins discovered this, let’s chat for a moment about two big players in the sciences: Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein.

In the 17th century, Isaac Newton pioneered an understanding of the universe (not surprisingly known as “Newtonian” physics) which describes the forces affecting very large things in the universe. What Newton observed has become the basis for most of our modern sciences. This model produces an understanding of a universe that is almost mechanical in its cause-and-effect nature—“what goes up must come down,” and all that jazz. 

But then in the early part of the 20th century, Albert Einstein came along and really shook things up. He showed us that there’s more to the universe than what we can see. His work revealed that “energy and matter are so deeply entangled [that it’s] impossible to consider them as independent elements” (Bruce H. Lipton, Ph.D). Einstein’s discoveries didn’t negate Newtonian physics; they just revealed that the universe is much more complex—and invisible—than was previously thought.

But still, more than 300 years since Newton’s discoveries, the traditional sciences (e.g., biology, chemistry, astronomy, etc.) largely ignore Einstein’s model. As cellular biologist Bruce H. Lipton said in his book The Biology of Belief, the majority of scientists “stick to the physical world of Newton and ignore the invisible quantum world of Einstein, in which matter is actually made up of energy.” 

But why does it matter (physics pun not intended) what the universe is made of? It matters because the more we understand what the universe is made of, the more we understand our place in it, and what we’re made of.

Don Lincoln, a senior experimental particle physicist at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Illinois has this to say: 

Everything—and I mean everything—is just a consequence of many infinitely-large fields vibrating. The entire universe is made of fields playing a vast, subatomic symphony. -Don Lincoln

So, everything is composed of vibrating fields of energy. Your body is energy, your thoughts are energy, the device you’re reading this on is energy, the potential amazement or disbelief or frustration or enjoyment you’re experiencing right now in response to reading this is energy. This Reality is what enabled David R. Hawkins to discover the previously unknown fact that human consciousness isn’t a phenomenon that originates in our brain; it’s actually a field of energy that we’re all participating in and expressing aspects of.

Consciousness is an energy field, and what’s more, Hawkins' research confirmed that everything in the universe is actually a unique (but quantifiable) expression of the energy field of consciousness. 

Another way to say that “everything is energy” is “everything is consciousness.” The energy field of consciousness is a substrate of everything that exists.

“Whoa.” -Bob from Accounting


“Whoooooa.” -Bob from Accounting

I know. 

In the last post, I used light to help demonstrate how the field of consciousness can be described as a spectrum. Looking at this again, let’s use the colors blue and red as examples. They look very different to us, but they’re really just distinct expressions (or frequencies) of the same energy field.



But with the field of consciousness, instead of blue and red, we get things like grief or love (depending on the vibrational quality of whatever we’re considering).


I recently received a cease and desist letter from the late David R. Hawkins' estate demanding that I remove the image that I created which referenced the Map of Consciousness that he created. I tried to arrive at an arrangement with them for permitted use, and they threatened legal action against me. I'm unclear on what's going on there as the image (and Hawkins' work) is shared and published on blogs and websites (particularly Facebook) regularly. So, I've removed the image I created, but am including this link to another resource for the Map of Consciousness that I've had no part in creating or posting. 


“Ok, so how is the level of consciousness of something determined? I’m pretty sure Quickbooks doesn’t have a feature like that.” -Bob from Accounting

Good question, Bob. Also, what impeccable timing! 

The testing method used to calibrate energy

The primary tool for discovery in consciousness research is a form of muscle testing similar to what’s traditionally been called “Applied Kinesiology.” Have you heard of it? If not, you may be familiar with “kinesiology”—the study of body movements that’s at the core of disciplines like orthopedics and physical therapy. “Applied Kinesiology” is a slightly less-known clinical method used to identify a patient’s response to various stimuli using their musculature.

This is a method frequently used by practitioners like naturopathic doctors, chiropractors, and nutritionists. A practitioner using Applied Kinesiology is able to directly “ask” the body of a patient how it responds to various things like allergens or supplements, and determine what might be of assistance or potentially harmful to that specific and unique person.

A very simplified description of what happens during a test is that a muscle group stays strong and is able to resist pressure, or loses strength and can't resist even minimal pressure. 

When performing Applied Kinesiology, a strong group of muscles are targeted for testing. The most common involve the deltoid and trapezius muscles in the shoulder. Not only are these generally rather strong muscles, when they’re flexed to hold the arm out (as seen in the picture below), they have something of a “locking” quality to them. This helps the moment they weaken to be particularly noticeable. 

The tester has the testee hold their arm parallel to the ground, and then applies pressure to the testee’s wrist at the appropriate moment. 

“Wait, what?! Why the heck are you testing a muscle to understand the universe?” -Bob from Accounting

Ok, I think we need to take a trip to...


Welcome to The Skeptics' Lounge! Bob has some understandable questions, so I want to address those here. 

Alright, Bob, what’s up? 

“Well, I googled this 'Applied Kinesiology’ stuff and found a bunch of links saying it’s pseudoscience.” -Bob from Accounting

Oh boy. There are a lot of people on the internet saying that Applied Kinesiology is “pseudoscience,” but those people fundamentally misunderstand what they’re trying to criticize. This common sort of misunderstanding is why I mentioned the difference between Newtonian and quantum physics. 

The “that’s pseudoscience!” camp are really hung up on the linear Newtonian idea of “things,” and through that lens, they’re right—the testing makes absolutely no sense. Neither do things like homeopathy or acupuncture, but what’s happening here is they’re inadvertently trying to jam a square peg through a round hole. 

It’s like trying to listen to music with your nose.

Music isn’t mumbo-jumbo, you just can’t hear with your nose. Likewise, if you’re trying to understand the non-physical by applying what you’ve observed about the physical, you’re going to wind up confused (and angry, judging by a lot of the Pseudoscience Camp’s online commentary).

There is a healthy form of skepticism that leads to open and curious questioning (aka, actual science), and then there’s the variety of dogmatic allegiance to what someone already thinks is “real.”

The dogmatic variety of skepticism closes minds and causes people to arrive at erroneous conclusions. It's the secular version of how some people try to use religion to cram everything in life into a nice, tidy, shrink-wrapped, binary little package (e.g., good/bad, right/wrong). 

“Hmmph. Ok, but couldn’t one person just shove the other’s arm down? Like a bodybuilder ‘testing’ a little old lady?” -Bob from Accounting

Absolutely, but that wouldn’t be an accurate test. The testing has nothing to do with overpowering the other person’s muscles, and in fact, very little pressure is needed. What’s happening when the muscle goes weak is that there is a momentary break in the electrical system of the testee’s nervous system, which results in the muscle reacting as if it was momentarily “unplugged” from its power source. 

This becomes visible through the tester’s ability to push down the testee’s arm with minimal pressure.

Ok, we’re leaving The Skeptics’ Lounge now. 

Back to the subject at hand, let’s look at an example of how Applied Kinesiology might be used clinically. Let’s say a doctor wants to determine if a certain patient responds well to a packet of vitamin C powder. They can use the muscle test to see if the patient’s nervous system remains uninterrupted when encountering the substance, or experiences a momentary break in its coherency. 

Similarly, the doctor could do another test using an organic carrot and a bottle of rat poison. While holding the rat poison, the patient’s arm would weaken dramatically because it’s a harmful substance, but with the carrot (as long as the patient isn’t allergic to carrots), the musculature will stay strong.


This isn’t surprising when you recognize that one of the most basic functions of survival is the ability to determine what is harmful or beneficial in one’s environment. As Dr. Lipton says, “all organisms, including humans, communicate and read their environment by evaluating energy fields.”

“Okay, I get how my muscle could go weak if a doctor had me hold a bottle of rat poison. I mean, it’s full of poison! But how the heck does any of this relate to consciousness??” -Bob from Accounting

Well, while it might appear that what you’re observing with the bottle of rat poison is your physical body responding to the physical liquid in the bottle, what’s actually happening is that the energetic “thing” you know as your body is reacting to the energetic “thing” we call rat poison. 

Your thoughts are also energy, and we have physical reactions to that variety of energy, too.

It’s all energy reacting to energy

Because of the energetic nature of everything and how it’s all connected in the field of consciousness, we can use the weakening of the physical musculature of our bodies to identify the quality of any information we’re encountering. We can use this physical response to “answer” questions.

As an example, let's say Stacy’s food keeps vanishing out of the office fridge and no one’s stepping forward as the snack snagger. We could use the testing to get a better idea of what’s going on. We could use a test statement like:

Test Statement: “Bob is telling the truth when he says he didn’t take Stacy’s peanut butter and jelly sandwich out of the office fridge and eat it.”

Test Result: Not yes

Uh oh. 

So in this hypothetical example, the muscle of the test-subject went weak, indicating that the information in that test statement did not match with any Reality. 

But why did I write “Not yes”? If the muscle had stayed strong it would have demonstrated “Yes, that information is coherent with something that exists in the field of consciousness,” but since it went weak, what it demonstrated was “Nope, there’s nothing there.” So it’s showing an absence of a “yes,” not the opposite of a “yes” (i.e., “no”).

One way to conceptualize this is shown in the animation below. The moving horizontal line represents the flow of information passing through someone’s awareness. Where the line is solid, the part of the field being accessed exists, and where it breaks, there’s nothing actually there (i.e., it’s something that is perceived or imagined but that isn’t actually Real).


Using light as an analogy again, this is similar to darkness. Darkness isn’t a “thing” that opposes light. It’s just the absence of light. In the same way, “no” isn’t a “thing” that exists in Reality—it only exists as a linguistic convention (i.e., a word).

Accurate information either exists, or it doesn’t. That is the binary “yes” or “not yes” nature of what’s seen through the muscle testing. And this is the reason that the test results are objective. Something existing or not existing has nothing to do with what anyone knows about it, thinks about it, feels about it, or recognizes about it. The testing doesn’t produce an opinion any more than a thermometer produces an opinion when it reads 96˚.

Something either is, or it isn’t. 

Learning to do the testing

At this point, maybe you’re itching to try this interesting ability you didn’t realize you had. Like anything, it requires practice to do well. So in much the same way that you wouldn’t pick up a cello if you’ve never played before and expect to rock out like Yo-Yo Ma, please understand that instruction and practice are required with the muscle testing, too.

One of the challenging parts of learning to do the testing well is cultivating an internal state of objectivity, which is not what we’re generally encouraged to practice. Simon Cowell, who is an expert in not being objective, said “If you've got a big mouth and you're controversial, you're going to get attention.” 

See? We live in a culture where “having an opinion” is generally valued way above observing what’s actual, so it’s not a skill most of us have practice with, let alone mastery of. 

Teaching the testing isn’t my area of expertise, so this post doesn’t get into the specifics of that. But, if you decide to learn, Power vs. Force is a great place to start—it’s not a training manual, but it does give a general overview of the testing process. It also provides radical insight into what is possible through the testing and goes into great detail of the Map of Consciousness (which is an invaluable tool). 

Also, I know a brilliant consciousness researcher named Eric Burlingame (who is an energetic health advisor and human behavior expert I have done a lot of work with). He is nearing completion on several books about the testing and his mind-bending research, as well as other resources for learning and understanding the testing. 

(You'll hear more from Eric in the next post about Donald Trump). 

Wrapping up

Since everything is energy in the field of consciousness (including you and me), and we’re all fundamentally connected to that field, this means that virtually anyone in any location can calibrate information and get the same test result as someone else performing the same test in another place.

In Portland, OR, I can test the Level of Consciousness of actor Will Smith while someone in Hawaii performs the same test, and we’d get the exact same result. I’ve seen this happen in real-time via Skype—it’s pretty rad. 

The objectivity of this phenomenon means that humanity no longer has to be trapped in an endless debate about whose opinion or belief is the “right” one. Virtually anyone can calibrate the energetic state of books, beliefs, belief systems, people, and even their own level of consciousness.

What areas of life can you think of where humanity would benefit from having more clarity? Business? Politics? Human rights? Well, let’s look at a real-world example of how the testing can be applied to exactly those sorts of things. 

There has been a lot of crazy stuff coming out of Donald Trump during his 2016 Presidential campaign. Wouldn’t it be amazing if there was a way to get an objective perspective on the energetic quality of what’s behind this man and his rhetoric? ;)

Part 3 of 4: Revealing the Hidden Danger in the 2016 Presidential Race

Why Is the World So Crazy?! The Hidden Determinants of Human Behavior

Why Is the World So Crazy?! The Hidden Determinants of Human Behavior

Revealing the Hidden Danger in the 2016 Presidential Race

Revealing the Hidden Danger in the 2016 Presidential Race