Probable Selves Show Up in Mainstream Science and Literature: Seth Explains, Part 2

In Part 1 of this post, we introduced the idea of probable selves. Next we will explore details from both quantum mechanics and Seth.

What is the “vast bank of probabilities” from which Seth says all realities arise? Quantum theorists have called it the implicate order (theoretical physicist, David Bohm) or the zero point field (theoretical physicist, Max Planck) or the holographic reality (psychologist and neuroscientist, Karl Pribram); metaphysicians and new scientists call it the Akashic field (Hindu mystic, Sri Aurobindo; philosopher of science, Ervin Laszlo); Seth calls it Framework 2. Basically, it is a field of all probabilities out of which our reality is formed.

All I can do in this blog post is point you toward some of the areas of science that correlate with Seth’s ideas. The main point is that strong correlations exist. I’ll keep the science to a minimum, however.

Framework 2 is not in physical reality, although all versions of reality (probable realities) interact with it. This field of probabilities can be equated with the quantum wave function of quantum mechanics. This is a complicated topic but I just want to make a couple of points. First, for about a hundred years now, physicists have known that electrons are both particles and waves. Until you take a measurement to determine where exactly an electron is, it seems to be spread out over a portion of space and there are only probabilities that you will find it in any one location in that space when you look. The wave function just describes that probabilistic situation.

Second, physicists also know that the underlying reality, by whichever name you call it, is teeming with particle interactions happening at tremendously fast speeds. During these interactions, so-called virtual particles and anti-particles are created and annihilated and tiny wormholes are formed. In physics, the result has been called quantum foam (If interested, you can read more here:

Seth says that tiny black and white holes do indeed exist and they are responsible for energy entering and leaving our physical world. He refers to this as “blinking on and off.” Since we are made up of quantum particles ourselves, Seth claims that we are also blinking on and off.

Accordingly, when we blink off we are dipping back into the field of all knowledge, where all probabilities exist and our consciousness looks in another direction, as Seth would say. These other directions may be other probable realities.

When we blink back on, our consciousness is focused once again in the physical world.  We get the impression that our existence is continuous; but there are actually these pulsations of energy going on all the time. It all happens far too quickly for us to notice.

What directs all this activity? Seth claims that it is the intensity of our thoughts and emotions. Depending on our intentions, with each blink we have the potential to change by actualizing a new probability.

This process chooses significances . . . around which experience is built, and around which ‘life’ is felt. The very sensations of one kind of life then automatically set up barriers against other such ‘world-schemes’ that do not correlate with their own. (The ‘Unknown’ Reality, Volume One, Session 684, p. 60)

Continue reading[..]

Probable Selves Show Up in Mainstream Science and Literature: Seth Explains, Part 1

One complaint that I’ve heard about the Seth material is that Seth’s claims about the nature of reality are too farfetched and the explanations too complicated. I don’t agree with the assessment that Seth’s ideas are implausible. However, a lot of the detail is difficult to grasp. It has taken me many years to get clear on some of the ideas, and each time I revisit the material, I seem to grasp a little bit more.

I’ve been aided along the way by other source material, most notably, from quantum physics, at least to the extent that I can understand it. The channeled material of Elias is also helpful in that he often elaborates on topics that Seth introduced but for which Seth didn’t give exhaustive detail. The Elias material is interesting because Elias doesn’t dictate books, like Seth did, but answers questions posed by people who attend the sessions. A lot of those people ask the same questions I would ask if I could. (Here is a link to the Elias Forum where you can search the transcripts by topic:

Occasionally, illumination will come unexpectedly, as recently happened when I read a popular novel. The book was the first novel of a young, British author, Laura Barnett, called The Versions of Us. I have no idea whether Ms. Barnett is familiar with the Seth material, but her book brought a particularly perplexing concept—probable selves—to life for me.

I won’t spoil the story for you, but it is safe to give you the basics. The story revolves around two main characters, Eva and Jim. They are Oxford University students who meet by “chance,” when they are 19. Barnett writes three different versions that all begin at this meeting point. From there, three “probable” versions of each of them spin off into different probable realities. The author follows the main characters throughout their entire lives, showing us how their choices affected them in each alternative timeline–an interesting, though not entirely original conceit.  More surprising, however, is the way Ms. Barnett includes incidents which suggest that these divergent timelines (or probable selves) continue to influence one another.  This is a concept I recognized from the Seth material, though I’d never seen it explored exactly this way in popular media.

So what are probable selves? Seth says that each probable self is a portion of your soul, which comprises many, many probable versions in our physical reality system, as well as many more versions in the reincarnational system. Every time we reach a choice-point, that is a moment where we are about to make a decision that will move our lives in a different direction–a probable self will spin off to follow “the path not taken.” In The Versions of Us, for example, Jim asks Eva out after they meet. In two of the versions she acquiesces, but in one she does not. This choice is significant because Eva is already in a relationship with someone else when she meets Jim, so going on a date with another man could initiate a meaningful change in her relationship.  Two probable realities are generated by her decision to date, or not to date, Jim.  Seth says, minor choices that don’t create major life changes do not cause a new probable self to form. Continue reading[..]