Relating Elements of
Interference-pattern Physics & Fractile Chaos Theory
To Elements of the New General Theory
of Human Development,Creativity and Genius

Win Wenger, Ph.D.
Project Renaissance & C.P.S.I., 1994

1. Interference-pattern physics began with acoustics, wherein it was observed that two parallel, side-by-side tones sounded together produced a beat frequency or third tone. Very slight changes in one tone produce very large changes in the resultant third tone, but in an orderly, predictable, accountable way. The huge, but orderly, difference means, in effect, considerable "room" in which to receive, process, store or retrieve information, as you modulate one or another of the original input tones.

The same was found to hold true with light, especially when laser technology enabled us to start generating and studying "pure tones" or frequencies of light, discovering the intra-universality of information previously unsuspected because ordinary light is so "noisy." The holographic spin-off of this, in turn, taught us much about the fundamental nature of the universe which we had not even come close to guessing at before, a totally different picture of how things are with which, even now, we are a long way from coming fully to terms. We've learned through both holography and interference-pattern physics, as well as through sub-atomic physics, that everything is part of and an expression of everything else, that information about any event is experienced and in some way recorded everywhere else, and affects everything else.

We found the same true for parallel streams of any energy or sets of events which are allowed to intermodulate: they produce complex resultants which are full of information at every point which can be retrieved by appropriate process, and in which very slight initial changes can produce huge differences in outcome but in an orderly, predictable way.

(Parenthetically: there will be, some day, optic computers based on this principle, one tabletop model of which will have greater computing capacity than all of today's computers lumped together. We've seen this in detail, in our "visionary" invention-finding procedure called "Beachhead" where, if the appropriate specialists could be assembled together willing to do our kind of processing, a working model of this computer could be on the table within three short days! We renew our invitation, for someone to help us assemble the necessary specialists for those three days.)

2. Interference-pattern physics, in turn, is a special case within fractile chaos theory (although workers in both fields may as yet be unaware of this relationship). Fractile Mandelbrot Sets and Julia Sets by derivation, are the resultant of complex systems expressing behavior and incorporating some of the feedback from that behavior into their evolution. Again, very slight initial differences lead to huge differences in outcome, but in orderly-but-strange, accountable but unpredictable, ways. Mathematically expressing this resultant is the Mandelbrot Set, every point in which is infinite and contains within it an infinite number of the same Mandelbrot Set, the most complex by far of any geometric or mathematical figure.

It is unclear at this point whether anyone in fractile theory or in interference pattern physics has noticed yet the relationship between these two fields, each of which by itself is and will be totally transforming our understanding of our world and of ourselves within the next decade or so. In the cited regard and perhaps generally, interference-pattern physics is a subset within fractile chaos theory. --But even as a subset, I.P. physics by itself totally transforms our understandings of the world and of ourselves on a scale not seen since Newton demonstrated that the same physical laws apply in our skies as they do on Earth. It may take us a few centuries to digest this transformation, as it did that one, but the transformation is here--now augmented by the fractile chaos theory in which I.P. physics is but a small sub-set!

One understanding that leaps out at us from this perspective, and one which should produce a virtual agony of appreciation and beauty and ecstatic significance in anyone who has studied fractiles for a bit, is that in our general model as of even three years ago, of complex systems expressing behavior and incorporating some portion of the resultant feedbacks into our subsequent evolution, that you and I fit this defining description of what are Mandelbrot Sets.

Another understanding also becomes apparent, and finally caught our attention on the morning of January 6, 1994. (Please excuse our noting the date, but the event does seem historic.) In the complex systems of feedback which develop between any organism or person and its surroundings during any sustained exploratory behavior, the entire universe can be found, not only in the literal sense but in that more and more aspects of the universe are bound to emerge in the (Mandelbrot Set) experience of the explorer.

A simple example is the startlingly high quality and beauty and creativity of the music which arises from long-sustained practice of Improvitaping, as published elsewhere, or of the art which can emerge from sustained doodle, in charcoal or other suitable media, which aspects we are only beginning to explore.

A more direct, and intellectually relevant, example, is our practice a la Walt Whitman and Socrates, of describing more and more about some particular focus or object of perception while examining it. A sustained such parallel processing, of descriptive activity and perception both intermodulating each other and also intermodulated by feedbacks from real and/or potential listeners, cannot fail to produce within the mind of the describer a Mandelbrot-Set perceptual tool within which to register the many facets and aspects of what he or she is examining! In Walt Whitman's sense most literally, there is no way that this process, intense and sustained enough, can fail to reveal "the entire universe" to the person pursuing this process!

These matters of physics are why Walt Whitman's ordinary blade of grass, or your own thumbnail, can show us "the entire universe!" These matters of physics are why, among other possible reasons, the person Socratically pressed to examine his perceptions and to describe what s/he discovers there, from time to time gives rise to those Socratic Miracle Leaps and, from this perspective, can now far more readily be guided into a more or less continuous flow of Socratic Miracle Leap.

Taken another way:

Suppose any particular object or event relates to its surroundings in innumerable ways--a few of these obvious, some less so, some considerably less so. --A few of these significant or meaningful, in the sense that a change there will produce enormous change elsewhere; some less so, some considerably less so. --That the obvious aspects or relationships are not in all cases the significant ones. This seems to be a common-sense description of things pretty much as they are.

Let us suppose also that, to borrow a page from the biological definition of intelligence as the ability of the organism or species, "in pursuit of its wants and needs, to take internal and external factors into account and use them," that "intelligence" in the above model be related to the number and range of aspects of any given object or event or situation that the person is able to perceive and take into account.
Let us proceed exponentially--let's say the person of 80 I.Q. can normally take into account aspects of first-order obviousness, arbitrarily defined as the 10 most obvious aspects or relationships of the given object or event. By reaching, he may be able also to register one or a few of the 100 second-order obvious aspects and relationships, but he doesn't ordinarily do much of that reaching.

Let's say the person of 100 I.Q. normally can account for most or all aspects up to second-order obviousness and, by reaching, can register one or a few of the 1000 third-order factors. That someone of 120 I.Q. normally can respond to third-order factors and by reaching a bit, to some of the 10,000 fourth-order factors, even if his everyday walks and habits of life normally prevent him from paying these much attention.

By the time one is attending dozenth-order or hundredth-order factors, as is so obviously feasible once you set up a Mandelbrotian/Socratic /Whitman-Blake Effect parallel describing-and-observing, and sustain that flow of behavior for awhile, you are addressing pretty large swathes of the universe itself. Nor is it surprising that, after pursuing such activities for a sustained while, one's apparent intelligence should sensitize to at least the next higher order of magnitude, even without recourse to our Pole-Bridging theory cited below or to our application of psychology's first law in terms of reinforcing subtler perceptions onto line with consciousness and with them the brain structures in which these first arise.

Why is the accuracy so high, of the understandings gained in this manner, in the very teeth of a universe universally governed by the tendency toward error as required by the entropy-increasing Third Law of Thermodynamics? We don't yet have a theory or model to account for this oddity--after all, this general proposition unveiled itself very recently--but those of us who have probed some way into this examining-and-describing experience are certainly impressed by the higher-than-conventional accuracy of the results. Some explanation of the higher accuracy may pertain in that the wealth of data and of subliminal inputs which are taken into account in this broader mental processing, allow cross-checking and also simply avoid errors of omission characteristic of purely linear, left-brained thought and perception. Even that issue of accuracy aside, it is easier by far, now, to see how it is feasible to Socratically educate the greater part of even today's school curriculum, most of that information forever and creatively usefully the student's own because he has discovered and expressed it himself, rather than that being one particle among the shovels-full that have been flung at his head while he sat dozing at his uncomfortable desk.

Also clear is some of how, by our pursuing such Mandelbrot-building activities ourselves, we can build ourselves, each other and our successors into a much finer order human being than has been the case until now. "Too little and too late" or barely in time?--to judge by the national and world news from day to day. Next opportunity to practice some Mandelbrot-building perceptual activity is right now, with your own tape recorder or with whomever is next to you and can be persuaded.

We have already seen Socratic "education" - giving rise to the Whitman/Blake, Principle-of-Description, Effect - congruent with the laws of physics as found in interference-pattern phenomena and in fractile Mandelbrot infinity-sets. Key to these effects is a sustained flow of expressive/descriptive behavior intermodulating with perception and with feedback from the context of an actual or potential listener. Einsteinian technique (free visualization or receptive visual thinking) not only enlarges considerably the domain of perceptual phenomena from which such effects may be most readily derived, but provides a body of phenomena which gives rise to such effects far more readily than does the concrete phenomena of external sensory perception directly. Because nearly all of Einsteinian-type or imagery-derived phenomena is initially subtle, reinforcing that onto line with consciousness increases available, apparent intelligence at a higher rate than does Socratic process alone.

One shortcoming in Socratic process mentioned early on in this paper but not elaborated until now, is that classical Socratic method failed to distinguish "knowledge" and "perception," its advocates and practitioners having been caught up in philosophic assumptions about the "ideal" which confuse map with territory so that it just didn't seem that important whether the insight connection made by the learner was from something he perceived first hand or was a link with someone else's second-hand information. (If the idea was reality and what's around us only a pale shadow of the idea or ideal, what matter from whom came the conception of the ideal so long as it was understood?)

We have seen Socratic leaps on occasion when one was addressing second-hand knowledge. Also, we are given to understand that the EEG brainwave signature of understanding an idea is much the same as that of perception itself. However, in our experience--as in our model--the process is far more effective and easily inaugurated when one addresses his own first-hand perceptions. Indeed, our experience with a variety of people strongly indicates that when one pays sufficient attention to what his own senses are telling him, the intellectual side of the matter takes care of itself very well for him.

If we are to rank orders of experience which are easiest and hardest to evoke the Whitman/Blake miracle leap effect, then, we find by far the easiest and most effective to be one's own experience of his subtler senses as with Einsteinian Imagery. Next easiest is one's own first-hand experience of his concrete, external senses. Hardest by far--and most prone to error besides, obviously--is "knowledge," especially second-hand knowledge.

Conversely, we find that when one speaks from second-hand knowledge, he is far less influential than when he speaks from immediately first-hand experience. Nearly all of the techniques taught in speech classes, occur naturally when one is speaking from first-hand experience on issues which matter to him. To be more influential, in other words, build a body of meaningful first-hand observations and speak from that experience as much as possible.

In our model, it is through intermodulating with feedback from context, that one's expressive behavior leads to best development or even to Mandelbrotian infinities. If it is the person's own perceptions, own purposes, own meanings which are being expressed, this development from intermodulation is strongest. Much or most of that development-from-feedback seems deflected away from the person to the extent that what's being fed back on or reinforced is not that person's.

In keeping with this model, two of the greatest educators in history have build instructional systems through arranging the context or environment in such a way that its feedback educate the child by selectively reinforcing the child's own natural behaviors.

Maria Montessori, drawing upon centuries of study by the University of Pisa, when forced to work with "unteachable" disadvantaged children in Italy, may have been first to devise learning environments to do that "teaching" instead, through appropriate feedbacks on those children's spontaneous activities. (Ironically, her method in the United States is mainly used instead with affluent, advantaged children who can also learn successfully by many other, less effective systems.)

Using technology (including the famous Edison "Talking Typewriter," University of Pittsburgh sociologist Omar K. Moore designed responsive, clarifying educational environments to provide high order feedback to the preschooler's incidental or spontaneous activities successfully causing, among other things, 2 & 3 year olds to read, write and type--without the constraints of a school situation, or any form of compulsion whatever. Only the arranged feedbacks on the natural play activities of the child would be what led to that learning.

Both of these educators achieved outstanding results by using essentially this same model of arranging contexts to educate children by feedback upon their own spontaneous, play, expressive behaviors. This ran wholly counter to the whole trend of 20th Century education which abandoned Socratic educating and turned to didactic teaching. Of course there have been a lot of other, diverse, models as well in terms of schools and schooling. Though suggestive, the results of Montessori and Moore by themselves do not more than incidentally support the model and certainly do not "prove" it. However, another researcher, another kind of researcher, from early in this century made discoveries which in fact strongly underpin this expressive model of development.

Widely recognized as the father of neuroanatomy, Santiago Ramon y Cajal from early in this century was not looking to create a theory or model or to even become the definitive authority on neuroanatomy. His focus was on scientific methods of taking samples and evaluating them and, indeed, the title of the encyclopedia which he singlehandedly published for over a decade was The Histology of the Brain. He however compiled and published so very many thousands of closely detailed observations from his work that he evolved a crucial model and theory which have never been controverted. Core of his relevant findings, published in English in 1960: the physical growth and development of vertebrate brains, brain tissues, and nerve circuitry, depends not so much upon genetics; not much upon stimulus as such, but mostly upon the form of stimulus which is feedback from the organism's own spontaneous activities!

Every neurologist and neurophysiologist during the latter 2/3 of the 20th Century stands on Ramon y Cajal's shoulders. Not one has ever controverted his main finding. Hardly any are aware of his main finding! Even the better neurologists and neurophyiologists, the ones since World War II beginning with Herd & Held and White extending on through Das and Rosenzweig and others, the ones who do recognize how radically intelligence can be changed, are discussing solely in terms of stimulating environments and non-stimulating environments, and have wholly neglected this issue of what actually develops the brain not being the level of stimulus, but the stimulus which comes as feedback from one's own activities!

Support GBD.com without it costing you a dime. Learn How

We are now beginning to look at one's present level of intelligence as reflecting to at least considerable degree how much of one's own perceptions he got to respond to and therefore to reinforce. Anyone much involved with schools gets to see acres of pained or dulled faces reflecting children whose heads may be full of all sorts of thoughts and perceptions, but sit there staring at an empty piece of paper "with nothing to say." A Los Angeles educator here at CPSI, Jon Pearson, is currently engaged in reaching such children and teaching them uses of doodling art, as a tool for retaining facts in memory and as a means of self-expression easier for some than words. We expect at least some intellectual benefits to accrue in that the stroke of a sketch or other doodle-mark is at least a response, and if done in response to one's own thoughts and perceptions, will help reinforce these into fuller, more usable consciousness and help build the conscious mind of the child.

Let's look again at what gets reinforced--A partial summary of your situation:

Psychology's "First Law"--"You Get More of What You Reinforce"--as feedback, is "the law" for all systems and events. Feedback--especially the self-stabilizing feedback of complexly homeostatic systems--is reinforcement! This same law, as adaptation, is law for not only all animal behavior but the behavior of plants and even viruses, all of lifekind. (Any life form which does not sense the feedback from its environs and adapt accordingly, does not last long and so all existing life forms display "obedience" to this "first law of psychology" in the form of adaptation.) And,

--As we saw in our physics discussion, this same matter of reinforcement, that increment of feedback in the Mandelbrot Set incorporated into evolving systems, makes this behavioral law a fundamental physical law of the physical universe. You are a fractal!

EACH TIME YOU NOTE, OR REMARK, OR IN SOME WAY RESPOND TO, ONE OF YOUR OWN PERCEPTIONS OR IDEAS--

1.You reinforce that particular perception. Within this general law, the Principle of Description: the more you detail something while you are examining it, the more and more you discover about it. How you can "discover the whole universe" in Walt Whitman's ordinary blade of grass! Socratic Method: get someone to examine his inner and outer perceptions and to describe in detail what he discovers there.

2.You reinforce the BEHAVIOR of BEING perceptive. How to become more creative, more observant. Socratic Method. Our techniques of Portable Memory Bank; "Awareness-just-then![CLAP!]; such Einsteinian and post-Einsteinian practices as Image Streaming, our "Over-the-Wall" solution-finding procedure, High Thinktank solution-finding,and our recently published eight types of radically accelerated and enhanced learning technique.

And to the extent that the perceptions you so reinforce start out for you as SUBTLE, and therefore are mostly off-line from your verbal conscious mind--

3.You reinforce ONto line with consciousness those parts of your brain and mind which, from off-line, had given rise to that initially subtler perception. --Together with those parts' resources and intelligence!

Benefits 2 & 3 pertain when you reinforce what's fresh in your own perception, as distinct from when you pass along second-hand information, and do not pertain at all when you are chronically repeating an opinion even if it's your own opinion. "Get to learn a subject by teaching it" works only through the first of the above three benefits. Those three benefits are listed in increasing order of significance. If you must teach instead of educate, include in what you teach as much as possible of your own first-hand experience, especially your more sensitive, fresher or on-going perceptions.

What would be different in the world if many more people saw with their own eyes, spoke from their own perceptions? Much. Catharine Grant observed, in Terman's encyclopedic Genetic Studies of Genius (Stanford University) that practically the whole of civilization and culture was created by just a tiny handful few of original thinkers and perceivers. The rest of us were just technicians, hewers of wood and haulers of water to carry out what those few "culture giants" conceived. How well and by how much can we now enlarge this tiny handful? What if Earth's 5-1/2 billion people of today became as productive of genius as was Socratically-taught Classical Greece's few thousand citizens? Only your own experiences from the practices taught in "You Are Brighter Than You Think," or in Breakthroughs, can determine for you whether spread of those practices can realistically create such a new renaissance and forward surge of civilization.

Coming to Grips With The Issue of Improving Our Own Intelligence and Human Intelligence Generally:

Some years back I did a rough count and found more than two hundred different, controllable, factors which even then were known to affect various or all of the functions measured on an intelligence test. --And that was without including any of the "smart drugs" and very few of the now-known "smart nutrients" directly affecting the health and physical condition of the brain itself and its cells and tissues and circuits. "Smart" nutrients and drugs whose numbers burgeon from the dozens towards the hundreds as we learn more and more about brain chemistry and dynamics. I skipped over the "smart" substances not only because I knew and understood less about them, but because most of the drugs, at least, provide temporary gains only and my interest was and remains in such factors as will permanently increase intelligence. I was and am friendlier toward the nutrients, as distinct from the drugs, because as a matter of taste I prefer working with nature, with what's already going on in the system, rather than trying to override. A behavioral example of this preference you already have in "Brighter" or in Breakthroughs, using selective reinforcement to heighten or bring conscious some of the unconscious sidebands of thought and perception everyone has going on at all times, some of which sidebands expressing in "receptive" imagery. There are so many various options available with which to increase intelligence, we do have the luxury of such kinds of choice.

There is no behavior or trait associated with "intelligence" which cannot be readily and profoundly changed, by a great many diverse means. This despite the fossilized position remaining among our institutions and even among some of our professionals, that "you are pretty much stuck with the level of intelligence you were born with."
***
That belief, convenient because it "keeps people in their place" and places no obligation on anyone or any institution to "do something" about inadequacies in intelligence, was once based on Sir Cyril Burt's purported studies of identical twins separated at birth and raised in different environments. Burt himself eventually admitted to the fraud, the extent of which includes even his having made up the names of his purported co-authors, not only the data which seems to show a "stability" in I.Q. scores! Most professional texts today in this topic continue to cite his "study" as the main basis "proving" the "stability" of "intelligence"--but no longer cite him by name! Only "studies show...."

Besides Burt's "studies," professional texts still often cite two other bases for the belief that intelligence cannot be meaningfully improved. One of these bases is the speed of response to stimuli as measured cross-culturally--as if there would not be cumulative differences between someone living in a flashing neon-light district and someone else in the quiet countryside. --Or as if speed of response in all senses and sensori-motor areas would not be drastically dependent upon the quality of function of visual circuitry, sensory and motor, quality which can be drastically changed by methods which would take hours for any developmental optometrist simply to list, as well as by many other methods not yet familiar to that profession!

The other basis is the tendency of the highly intelligent to practice some form of what psychologists call "mental rehearsal"--but what else but that is Image-Streaming and our other forms of visual and mental imagery thinking? Hundreds of various programs today effectively teach forms of "mental rehearsal" - overtly, as in "Inner Tennis," or by inducing it as in Suggestopedia.

Preserving the fossil, of belief in birth-fixed limits on intelligence, by preventing the research which would finish dispelling that myth: in one of the top major universities in Washington, D.C., other departments threatened to get the funding cut off for the entire department of extensional and community education of that university if it dared go ahead with a study this writer had arranged through it, to teach Image Streaming and related practices to a test class recruited from the community for the purpose and to measure intelligence before-and-after. The indignant quote which came back to this writer, as this study was getting scrubbed, was: "You can't increase intelligence, and furthermore, you can't increase it here!"

Likewise preserving the fossil: we've lost track of the number of times, upward of a dozen, that a doctoral candidate somewhere, investigating some of these effects for his or her dissertation and nearly complete on that dissertation, was suddenly forced to change his or her dissertation topic. Fortunately, we were finally able to find independents with the integrity and stamina to conduct some independent university studies so that among our hundreds of techniques and procedures Image Streaming, at least, has been measured, and consistently found to produce 40 points I.Q. gain from only 50 hours of easy pleasant practice. Most of the other hundreds of techniques and practices seem to be at least somewhat in the same ballpark, in terms of effect, though many are based upon different dynamics than those cited here.

I am announcing here a new policy. We are about to approach more institutions with proposals for such studies, measuring effects on intelligence, factors within intelligence such as on reading and language skills, rates and qualities and levels of learning, etc.
The new policy is this. Each person, each official, each institution which turns this down, I shall publish by name, together with his/her/its stated reasons for doing so. Let whomsoever wishes to remain with that fossil and duck his/her professional and institutional responsibilities to their students and patients and/or to science, go on record as they do so! (For ethical reasons we shall not do this on the 3 thousand and some who, when approached before this policy was announced, opted to stay with the fossil.) Warning: sometimes you won't know it was us in the approach until afterward--it may be your own student approaching you with a research proposal. If you refuse the opportunity to make positive history, you may nonetheless make the history books--by name, in rich detail! Something to be famous for!

Likewise, we suggest such independents as are among those who read this to consider implementing such a policy themselves on behalf of pursuit of your truths and findings. Between us, perhaps we can nudge both academia and science over toward becoming the fair-minded open inquiry systems which they would have liked to have been!
Remember: that not only throughout history but right now, not only the professions but the sciences are human social groups first, and what they are "supposed" to be a long second, all the more so to the extent that their members are unconscious of their own in-group territorialistic instincts. We all have those instinctive behaviors; in this instance, unfortunately, most of humanity suffers because of it. Yet science may well be the best thing going on this planet, attractive because it comes closer than do other pursuits toward the ideal of fair-minded, self-corrective, open inquiry. We just have yet still a little distance to cover to reach that ideal.

Regarding whether it is desirable to be intelligent or more intelligent:

1. Is it not desirable to be able to identify and readily solve a variety of problems? Is it not reasonable that skills for so doing can be trained, practiced, nurtured, expanded?

2. Is it not desirable to be better able to cope successfully with a wide variety of stimuli and situations? --And reasonable that skills relevant to so coping can be trained and practiced?

3. Is it not good to be able to understand, both in words and beyond words? Is it not reasonable that the skills of such understanding can be built, trained and practiced?

4. Is it not desirable to be abler to think and perceive, in enough detail and enough scope and enough variety and enough richness and enough depth to involve a large conceptual vocabulary in support of these processes? --And will not both experiences and vocabulary building affect such skills?

5. Is it not good to be abler, when need be, to respond to the unexpected quickly and effectively? --Do not only a host of trainable skills, but readily changed physiological conditions, greatly affect such speed and accuracy of response? (Why else do we train up response patterns and physical condition in competitive sports? But - ah, we forgot: giftedness is worth something to society only in athletics. It's so much more valuable to society to be able to throw a football well than to write a new symphony or a new formula. --though train with Image-Streaming et.al. and you may also become abler to throw a football well! --But still, it is an everyday experience, everywhere, to train such response skills and speed, even if it's only done in sports!)

6.And is it not desirable that experience be richer, more meaningful? (--And was not "education" originally designed to bring that about?)

Ah, but put these and/or similar factors together and call them "intelligence" and suddenly the fossil is invoked. "You can't increase intelligence and furthermore, don't do it here!"

Aside from all the many practical benefits of increasing your intelligence: sometime, with a color-blind friend by your side, gaze together at an absolutely gorgeous sunset and ask your color-blind friend whether and why s/he'd like to be able to see color. This comparison is very close, certainly in terms of richness of life, experience, perception and meaningfulness. --And even though we don't yet know how to train the color-blind to see color, we do know how to train 50 or more points "I.Q." increase in general personal mental capability and richness of living.

Moreover, now, so do you! --Which does no good whatsoever until and unless you act on that knowledge, one procedure or one Image-Streaming session at a time....

A More General Way To Build Intelligence: "Pole-Bridging:"
Reinforcing subtle perceptions, to reinforce more onto line with consciousness parts of the brain which previously were offline, is a particular case in a more general model of what we call "Pole-Bridging the brain." Linking unconscious to conscious regions of the brain is not the only way in which linking up various separate regions of the brain may increase intelligence.

Thousands of specific perceptions, types of experience, or other functions have, during a century of brain research, been identified with specific separate regions of the brain. Nobel Laureate Roger Sperry's summation of differentiated functions of widely separate, distinct regions of the brain in and/or below the cortex, is but one example, an example perhaps now overdrawn and too popularized.

Not only left and right but front and back and vertically: Pole-Bridging combines functions of widely separate, distinct regions of the brain in and/or below the cortex, into expressive, intense combinations of activity which force those widely separate regions of the brain to work closely together. Whether between literally "opposite poles" of brain function or simply between distinct and separate regions, this intense combination builds up bridges of communication between those separate regions.

Image-Streaming "pole-bridges" between verbal conscious, in the left temporal lobe, and various sites throughout the rest of the cortex and opposite temporal lobe involved in visualization, in the perceptions and insights which are the basis of those "undirected" or receptive visualizations, and the beauty-perceiving parts of the right temporal lobe which are involved in "making sense" of complex stimuli. That is only one form of "pole-bridging," among many tens of thousands which are possible....

Pending some of those further research and measurement studies we were talking about just above: we have informally observed the practice of various forms of "pole-bridging" to apparently increase intelligence, and to develop far higher levels of perceptiveness and understanding in the practitioner. The possible number of diverse "pole-bridging" techniques is a factorial of the thousands of functions for which specific locations within the brain have been identified!

A familiar example of other types of "pole-bridging" is art and/or music, involving as these do both the beauty-responding sense-making right temporal lobe and the conscious, linear-tracking analytic left temporal lobe, among other things. Where performance is involved, say in sight-reading and playing music, this involvement extends considerably to include a wide range of motor functions, parts of the brain involved in reading, and parts of the brain involved in holding short-term memory, among other things. --Which is one reason why we believe that affluence and advantage are not the only reasons why most young children who have learned to sight-read and play music appear to become much more intelligent and perceptive than their peers and agemates. Music or art criticism, as a profession or as a sustained avocation, demands enough from differentiated-enough regions of the brain to enable us to predict a gradual, cumulative increase in overall intelligence over several years.

Integrating Phase Relationships:

The case for practicing forms of "pole-bridging" has been greatly strengthened by the discovery that to integrate phase relationships between widely separate regions of the brain, including between hemispheres, does far more to increase intelligence and effectiveness of brain than does even the "mere" effect of building up communications between those regions as means to make the resources of each more accessible to the other regions. (Both effects, though, are served by "pole-bridging.")

Phase relationships is a matter of how long one region of brain gets to handle a given stimulus before other regions become involved with that same stimulus. Eventually, the entire brain does "light up" on any given major stimulus anyway, but the key issue is what the rest of the brain does with that stimulus. This, in turn, is determined by the instructions which have been passed on, along with that stimulus, by the brain sectors which were earliest to handle that stimulus--

--If so long a time passes that the earlier region can complete its handling of the stimulus and attachment of instructions to that stimulus, before other regions receive and become involved, the effect is a close-out. It's as if that first region were to say, "Here's how we handled it, folks!--You can go back to sleep now!" Thus, when the first region(s) to handle the brain have time to complete their handling, the rest of the brain does little if anything with that stimulus.

--On the other hand, if phase relationships are so close that other regions of the brain are already in there reverberating with the first on that stimulus before the first region is done, far more involved and sophisticated instructions get written into that stimulus for the rest of the brain to handle. ("Here's what we've done so far, we haven't completed thus and such on this yet; also you might see what you can turn up on x-y-z...") In other words,

If phase relationships are close enough to reverberate the later brain regions with the earlier ones on the stimulus, before first operations are complete and instructions attached to that stimulus for the rest of the brain's handling of it: far more involved and sophisticated instructions result. The rest of the brain is instructed to handle that stimulus with far more intelligence than would otherwise be the case. A person with well-integrated phase relationships in his or her brain, characteristically will see more relationships and aspects in each stimulus and live a far richer experience.

John Ertl, inventor of the brainwave analyzer device and program that measures I.Q. from brainwave responses to flashes of light and pulses of sound, in the late 1960s may have been first to associate close phase-relationships, between left and right hemispheres, with high intelligence and with creative intelligence. He imparted this information to this writer in 1982 during one of the latter's visit to Toronto, Ontario, in the manner of a no-longer secret trade secret. Ned Herrmann, now settled with his program into Lake Lure, North Carolina, restates this left-right cortical relationship more strongly and publicly, and extends it also to left and right halves of the limbic system as well. Wherever those who have the means have bothered to look, people with close phase relationships between different regions of the brain appear to function more intelligently, and certainly more creatively, than people with loose phase relationships. Pending test results, which fossil-preservation may cause to be a long time in coming, we've strong reason to believe that this phase relationship issue holds for all directions and dimensions in which the brain displays differentiable functions, not merely left and right. This hypothesis is supported toward being a useful theory if we can also interpret the apparent intelligence gains associated with the sensori-motor developmental patterning program, organized around the ontological/phylogenological development model posited by Temple Fay and pursued variously through various clinics around the world including the original I.A.H.P. in Philadelphia, to result, at least in part, from vertical integration of the brain, between brain stem and higher cortex and the levels in-between.

Worth mentioning again: thousands of location-specific functions of the brain have been identified. Weaving together in external, expressive behavior, several of these functions to force several of those diverse locations to work more and more closely together, integrates the phase relationships between those locations forcing whatever regions of the brain first receive a stimulus within such a relationship to characteristically involve more complex and sophisticated handling instructions attached to that stimulus--resulting in more intelligent handling of that stimulus. The number of possible treatments and intelligence-building procedures which can be devised upon this principle is a factorial of the number of differentiated location-specific brain functions!

--In other words, there is huge ROOM for researchers to do the kinds of original, ground-breaking and humanly beneficial work which will make them famous and which will provide them the
"immortality of footnotes" in future texts and treatises. This major general strategy of ways to increase intelligence is very new, a tremendously wide-open and productive area in which to do original research.

Applicability of Intelligence-Building Procedures To Different Populations:

The only formal measurement studies completed thus far are those by Reinert, op.cit. Though he worked in a rural state university campus with mostly college-age students and adults, he was unable to discover a difference in response between those ages. Also, he could find no "tail-off" point of high intelligence where gains would diminish, though he did find a distinct sub-group of some remedial students whose I.Q. gains from Image-Streaming was more than double the standard rate per hour of such imagery work. One study in a nursing home he could not publish because the aged patients were initially too ill to be tested, so that before-and-after scores were unobtainable: their gains appeared to be at least as strong, however, as those of the other populations. In our own experience, bright students and adults appear to gain as much as or even more than do other populations, though this may simply reflect our experience that these already-bright ones are easier to teach the procedure to and are readier to appreciate the value of practicing it.

It is from occasional opportunities to work with members of yet another population, though, that this writer has experienced some of his greatest joys. Children ages 2 to 5 image stream quite readily and even as they are doing so, their development is so responsive to what is happening that you can literally see them growing more intelligent, sensitive and articulate right before your eyes! To see this and to know that you had something to do with bringing this wondrous surge of growth about, in another human being who has nearly all his life still ahead of him in which to enjoy such gains and to nurture them further--that is indeed one of the highest joys this writer has experienced.

With a child that young, it's something that can't be forced, only invited or like a game. You do need to have practiced Image Streaming yourself, enough to become fairly facile at it, but once you have done so, teaching the procedure is simply a matter of modeling:

>"You know, Mary (or John or whomever), I think we're dreaming all the time, not just when we're asleep. Because for example, right now I can close my eyes and see a dream going.....I see an old tree stump, about 2 feet across, it's smoothly cut across like with a saw, except over at the right edge it has a jagged fringe sticking up. It's old because its all gray and all the bark has weathered off. The grass around is thin and about 3 inches tall, and when I look down closely at it it seems to have come up through sawdust. All this is on the side of a grassy hill; in front of me down the hill are some trees with the light behind them, so they look dark with all their leaves to shadow the light....

>"--When you close your eyes, John (or Mary or whomever), what do you see?"

--and as easily as that, the child is into his or her own Image Stream. The very young, and the developmentally young, may tend at first to only name objects and need encouragement to begin describing in detail but once that is under way, you can literally see a wholer human being blossoming before your very eyes!

Rejoice!

So in conclusion of this section, we have found such activities as Image Streaming to build intelligence and to be easily learned by virtually every kind of population, from the very old to the very young, as well as by people of whatever age at whatever levels of intelligence up to the time they undertake this practice. The incidence of breakthrough scientific discoveries and technological inventions which came through receptive visual thinking, deliberately as in the instances of Tesla and Einstein or by accident in the instances of Howe and Kekule, suggests that the same remains true through the highest ranks of intelligence or of creative intelligence.

Case for A Special Effort To Get The Resources of This Book to the Already-Gifted:

Not only from our developmental model but from many other sources, it is clear that the basic human nutrition is appropriate feedback.

So defined, it is clear that, by nature of their exceptionality, the human population which normally is most deprived, most starved of this basic human nutrition, is that of exceptionally gifted children. Thus, a case exists for getting such practices as Image Streaming into the use of such children, in order to enrich in some form at least the feedbacks for which they are starved and must grow upon.

Also, it must be said that the gifted have a shorter distance to travel, in terms of intelligence- and insight-building, to reach the point where they can contribute meaningfully to civilization and to the lives of the rest of us! Further, the United States, having wasted so much of its talent the past several decades, is increasingly in desperate need of some gifted leadership in all fields. Thus exists a practical case, alongside the humanitarian.

Having found this book's contents applicable to all types and levels of people, including the exceptionally gifted, let us now test the range of these resources by looking at the needs of the deeply remedial and/or intellectually challenged...
Regarding True Remediation and Therapy:

The three most universally agreed laws in behavioral science--

Psychology's "First Law" - You Get More of What You Reinforce.

Neurophysiological Development's Two Prime Laws--which turn out on inspection to be derivative from Behavior's "First Law"--

1.First develop the perception--THEN you can act through that perception. Simple example: once your leg has "gone to sleep" from a cramped position, it is difficult to use that leg with any skill until one has circulation - and perception - back in that leg. (--In part because of lack of reinforcement a la Psychology's First Law to maintain the skilled behavior!)

2.First, find what is working. Then go to the boundaries of what's working, and practice to finer and finer degrees of differentiation from there. (Establish reinforcement to finer and finer degrees of difference...)

Another key, well-established law of neurophysiological development albeit not as widely known: Each higher mental or brain behavior has antecedent components. Virtually any higher function can be repaired or established through building up and integrating its antecedent components, until satisfactory feedback reinforcement comes through its completed patterns.... This, also, upon inspection is derivative of that behavioral "first law" which, in discussions above, we found also to be a facet of biology's law of adaptation for all lifekind, the key to self-stabilizing systems behavior, and a physical general law of the material universe itself which has organized itself into Mandelbrotian fractiles.

We do not repeat the error of the Behaviorists here. Certainly Behavior's "first law" is not the only determining factor bearing on anything much less everything! It is, however, a very satisfyingly broad window with which a great many phenomena can be viewed and partially accounted for, and from which a great many phenomena may be appropriately predicted.

Indeed--and it seems strange to say this in view of the high creativity which various Behaviorists have contributed at times across a variety of fields--we may chide "Behaviorism" generally for a failure either of imagination or of scope of ambition, for their failure to recognize their own law operating in other disciplinary domains. I suppose that to admit a relationship one way is to admit a relationship in more than one direction, and to extend to other sciences besides the sociobehavioral would have forced behaviorists to acknowledge other natural laws at work besides "their" own, such as the laws of thermodynamics, gravity, 0-sum and non-0-sum games strategy, and other such considerations.

In keeping with Pole-Bridging Theory (as cited just 2-3 pages above): Find or invent an integrated behavior involving closely together the expressed behaviors of widely separated regions of the brain. The task of working the outputs of those widely separated regions closely together in external behavior, and the reinforcive feedbacks therein generated, build up a closer network of supportive connections within the brain between these several regions. Note that this combination of behaviors must be expressive, thereby involving the "loud," external, senses, in order to generate strong enough reinforcive feedbacks.

(Image-Streaming, describing in great verbal detail to a listener or to tape, the contents of ongoing apparent free-association visual mental imagery, combines several major regions of apparent right-brain function with the verbal conscious left temporal lobe. It's effects are comprehensive because, apparently, a wide diversity of brain tissues offline from consciousness give rise to the information imposed upon the ongoing imagery-generating process and so themselves become reinforced more onto line with conscious regions of the brain.)

The effects of such activity are cumulative and profound. In the forms of Pole-Bridging such as Image-Streaming and the sudden capture of sidebands of awareness (CLAP!--"What were you aware of just now?") where the bridging is between consciousness and parts of the brain previously offline to consciousness, one may fairly characterize what is happening, despite the radical gains in I.Q. tests, as simply a matter of bringing one's actual intelligence more immediately useful--including bringing it to where it will "show up on an 'I.Q.' test." Yet for those who go through this experience, it is clear that far more important than "I.Q." gains are the more comprehensive, meaningful, numinous qualities of intelligence which show up even more.

We note also apparent gains associated with other kinds of Pole-Bridging, between various of the regions of the brain offline from consciousness. For that reason, little explored as it is at the moment, plus the qualitative changes in experience undergone by those whose Pole-Bridging links unconscious to conscious, plus the increase in characteristic complexity and involvement of instructions which are normally attached to stimuli in the brains of those who enjoy closer phase relationships between the various regions of the brain--for these three reasons, we have to go beyond simply saying that "whatever intelligence is already there, becomes more available." We have to acknowledge a fundamental improvement in the level of "intelligence" itself within that person.

With that much said, let us now turn to three case situations of immediate human and professional interest:

1. A recently developed remedial reading procedure which is both developmental and motivational.

2. Outlines of a potentially more effective treatment for varying degrees of serious brain-damage and/or mental retardation.

3. Outlines of a potentially effective treatment for retrieving and renormalizing even some persons who are currently in long-term deep coma.

A Remedial Reading Procedure, version for working one-on-one with the student in question: (NOTE: in some cases, the student in question might need to be guided through other forms of description exercise first until he gets the idea of "brainstorming" perceptual description, and learns to "keep on finding fresh things to say about that doorknob which still in some way describe it...")

After a student who is in remedial need (or a younger, normal child who is just learning to read), has read an appropriately interesting story or had it read to him, have him assume the role identity of one of the characters in the story. Let him be like a reporter exploring the situation and reporting back in real-time to the professional (or parent, or trained lay volunteer) who is guiding him. (What follows is a version of the type of "Periscopic" or "High-Leverage" learning method described below, and more extensively in Beyond Teaching And Learning op.cit.). Get this process as sensory-based as possible because we've learned that if we get the senses adequately involved, the intellectual side takes care of itself. Concretize this sensory process even to the point of having the student "making-believe" that he is pulling on the (imaginary) head of that character over his own and the body like a rubber suit over his own body... "Bring your eyes to where the eyes of _____ are, so that you can see through and with _____'s eyes," looking at one of the scenes in that story. "Bring your ears to where the ears of _____ are, so you can hear the sounds of this space in the story but through and with the ears of _____," and so on with all the senses and awarenesses of character _____ in the story. ****

Have the student describe in as much sensory detail as possible the scene from that story, as if he is that character in the midst of that scene reporting to you what's going on. --In present tense, like stop-camera action. Get the student to attempt to describe to you in such richly textured (sensory) detail that he literally forces his listener to experience the utter reality of what he is describing. --Preferably, he does this describing with his own eyes kept closed to see more freely, so he soon is describing from images in real time.

NEXT, orient on 1-2 of the things described in that scene and ask the student, as that character, to describe how he feels about those 1-2 items.

NEXT, have your student as that character describe WHY he as that character feels that way about that item!

BINGO! The sophistication and power of perception of your student has immediately jumped many levels! The more relaxed and comfortable the initial setting, and the more richly you can get him or her into this pattern of describing, the more rapidly will his skills and powers deepen and sophisticate.

Relating the above discussions of interference-pattern physics and chaos theory to these human behavioral aspects, note that this sequence of questions keeps the student focused on the target stimulus, long enough that his own feedbacks intermodulate with and sophisticate his expressed behavior in relation to that stimulus, giving rise potentially to virtually unlimited richness of perception. The reinforcements into consciousness of these richer subtleties through sustained fresh describing ("Don't edit yourself, describe freely, but don't repeat yourself more than you have to--see how many other fresh things you can find to say which help describe this [context]...") cumulatively sophisticate and enrich your remedial learner's experience, behavior and functioning. Your object truly is to "make your student's description into a Mandelbrot Set."

Further step: long after you've done a great many rounds of this kind of experience with this student, make a story out of this student's own personal situation, obviously or subtly as you see fit after working closely with him for so long, and handle THAT one similarly. See if the power and sophistication of thought and perception, built in the context of characters "who are safely in stories," cannot transfer across into the student's own immediate living. (Note: the insights from Image-Streaming also accomplish this desired effect cumulatively.) This storied approach, though, in most instances should be done only after 20 or more hours' practice in the "safe spaces" of "other people's stories."

Regarding Possible Treatment of Persons With Specific Brain Damage:
--specifically in reference to Santiago Ramon y Cajal, father of neuroanatomy, who determined that the main factor controlling physical development and growth of the physical brain in vertebrates is stimulus in the form of feedback from one's own expressive activities. This principal finding, standing for so long uncontroverted throughout most of this century, still stands well in advance of contemporary neurological posturing regarding general stimulus and "stimulating" or "unstimulating" environments as affecting physical brain development.
Modern findings do suggest that myelinzation and demylinization continue within the physical brain, as key to the level of development and function, throughout the lifespan and not only during the earliest months and years in humans. Moreover some findings, though still controversial, suggest structural regrowth occurring in some sites of traumatic brain injury in humans. Whether or not these structural recoveries indeed occur, there do appear to be sufficient grounds for experimentally and perhaps therapeutically retraining brain tissues which are adjacent to the site of such injury. A number of clinics, centers and individual professionals are, indeed, currently engaged in various forms of such retraining. Most of these, though not all, center upon a vertical integration model of brain therapy initially suggested by the late neurosurgeon Temple Fay, inventor of cryogenic surgery. Here, we suggest a somewhat different model for investigation.

Pole-Bridging theory, described more extensively above and elsewhere, has been initially supported by independently conducted university-based studies measuring the effects of Image Streaming upon various aspects of intellectual performance (op.cit). As we noted above, however, the remarkable gains in measured "I.Q." associated with practice of Image Streaming, compared to much smaller gains associated with other practices which were made to seem experimental, still have several alternative possible explanations. However the sheer breadth and quality as well as quantity of the gains made in those studies, as well as some experienced in related studies, suggest that the more expressive such activities, the stronger the gains, and that to emphasize much more expressive components in programs of enrichment and therapy would produce stronger gains in both neurological and intellectual function.

Regarding specific brain damage, this model strongly suggests that the therapist should catalog all the known functions of each of the brain tissues immediately adjacent to the site of traumatic brain injury--above and below, left and right, front and back or in whatever relationship which is adjacent to the site of injury and/or type of function which had been interrupted. Especially catalog those functions for which various of those tissues are primarily responsible. Also catalog all known functions of the tissues which have been damaged or destroyed by the injury (or by the deprivation). Then,

Creatively synthesize expressive activities for the patient which closely involve the catalogued functions of those adjacent surviving tissues. Cause these expressive activities to tightly involve external behaviors which force those several tissues to work more and more closely and immediately together. Accompany this specific Pole-Bridging program with a more general one such as our tested procedure of Image Streaming, which appears to create a much broader base of alternative available communications links throughout the brain. As phase relationships integrate among the surviving tissues adjacent to the injury site (as time lapse is reduced for the other tissues to become involved in processing a stimulus, so that they become more integrally involved before initial tissues complete their handling of that stimulus, leading as cited above to characteristically more complex and sophisticated instructions being attached to stimuli), the brain begins to function more intelligently and creatively. As phase relationships integrate among the surviving tissues adjacent to the injury site, gradually incorporate into the expressive activities of the patient such acts as involve the functions which were lost or damaged with the injury.

The prediction is that this pattern of treatment will produce a significantly higher degree and rate of recovery of behavioral functions which had been lost in instances of specific traumatic brain damage such as in strokes, car accidents, some asphyxias, some fevers, tumor removals, athletic concussion, etc.

We at Project Renaissance, including this writer, are neither therapists nor clinicians. For the full scope of this potentially beneficial human research to be investigated, needs the involvement of qualified professionals and/or institutions. Please reply to Win Wenger, Ph.D., Project Renaissance, 301/948-1122, Box 332, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20884.

How far can our previous statement extend, that we literally "need not leave anyone behind," that everyone can be given full access to the human experience and full opportunity to make his or her contribution to the general human experience of us all?

Extending to Possible Restoration of some Long-term, "Irreversibly Comatose" Patients:

>Once some area(s) of the brain can be gotten going, "Pole-Bridging" shows basically how to bridge across areas of the brain which are not yet functioning, to bring them back on line.

>Objective of this suggested treatment of deeply brain-injured, comatose patients based on Psychology's "First Law" --to reinforce any responses which can be gotten going, in such a selective way as to involve bringing online more of the patient than before.

>One strong method to arouse and bring online more of the patient, once any pattern of repeated stimulus and response is established, is from time to time to interrupt the pattern, looking for additional responses as a result to be evinced by the patient.

Even individual cells including brain cells, to say nothing of tissues, have been demonstrated to be subject to operant conditioning. By definition that means, that through selective reinforcement their behavior can be changed. We have a far more viable situation than that even with the most deeply longterm comatose patients.

In general: evoke response from the subject, even if that response is so slight as to be detectable only by sensitive bio-instrument such as EEG and EMG. Onto each response, however faint, feed back a controlled stimulus to train a greater response, until neural activity is heightened to a level which may encompass and reawaken some old patterns at the core. Then build from there, both with that set of principles and with Pole-Bridging as hitherto described. This suggested line of treatment basically is quite simple, though in each case both creativity and patience would be essential.

The topic is a real issue for this writer, who once had just an hour with one such case who, at the time, had been comatose and described as "brain dead" for twelve months following an automobile accident. Using combinations of stroboscopic light and sound, he set up a regular pattern of stimulus for the patient. The patient was soon evincing some clearly discernible anticipatory responses. Interrupting the pattern of stimulus, clearly aroused the patient to another level in his responses. Within that hour we progressed to the point where the patient was clearly answering questions with "yes/no" responses in his left big toe, apparently the only part of his body under current voluntary motor command. However, we had no more time than that hour; not being a physician this writer could only work covertly through arrangements with the patient's mother who was a nurse at that hospital, and the opportunity window closed. Eight months later, the patient died.

It is the conviction of this writer that that death was needless. With the patient already responding to the point of clearly apparent "yes/no" answers to questions after only an hour of this simple procedure as described above, we believe he not only need not have died but could have been brought back, through the procedures and context described above, to near or full normalcy. If a neurophysiologist or neurosurgeon can be found who is willing to test such a simple procedure, based as it so clearly is on principles so basically recognized within his own profession, please refer him to this writer, Win Wenger, Ph.D., Project Renaissance, 301/948-1122 or Box 332, Gaithersburg, MD 20884 USA.

Quite possibly quite literally: no one has to be left behind. A fully human life may well be possible for virtually everyone.

Although this brief book has been written for general use, by a very wide range of people and mostly by independent-minded adult laymen, this particular section has been addressed specifically to professionals in human service, especially educators, psychologists, neurologists, neurophysiologists and physicians. Despite the more general nature of the rest of this book, this brief is also a strongly urgent invitation, to those qualified professionals and institutions, to perform original research in highly humanly significant areas. There are presently a great many lines of inquiry which provide immediately straight-forward original opportunities to challenge and test key issues, principles and theories, and to literally make history in ways which profoundly help human beings. We will help you toward designing and performing such research in every way we reasonably can.

Together these several materials set a context, much of whose interior architecture of principles is yet to be formally structured in adequate detail, from which to appreciate some of what can now apparently be done for human development and repair. The rest of that architecture will become apparent when we have completed our main text in this context, Toward A General Theory of Human Development, Creativity and Genius, expected publication to be in late 1995. In the meanwhile, we hope that providing you this information even in its present incompletely written form will show you enough of the context to aid you in your own work and to help human beings.

Returning from a clinical or therapeutic context, of getting people up to O.K., to a more general context and to working "beyond o.k.," those readers who have acquired the Quick Course In Music Creativity (op.cit.), will find in that package a description of Project Renaissance's endeavor to develop, on computer, an early childhood program conveying pleasantly, within but a few days, a natural feel for mathematical proportions and relationships together with the first 8-10 years of school arithmetic operations; and another early childhood program conveying in but a few very pleasant days basically the internal musical abilities evidenced by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart--both these programs based entirely on creative combinations of the very same principles as began the above "therapy brief:" Psychology's "First Law" with the above-cited "prime laws" of neurophysiological development. (We need a gifted computer programmer or so, especially one gifted in graphics, in order to complete these two programs.) Moreover, it will be clear upon inspection that similar use of these principles in other contexts, will yield similarly advanced results in virtually every field of human competence, skill and endeavor.

Most of this book was written for your immediate use, or to add levels of understanding to your use of its suggested procedures and practices so that these are neither a rote ritual requiring belief, or any kind of mystery requiring faith. Everything in those sections of the book is immediately testable in your own experience--and such a validity-checking is not only proper but advisable since so much of the effects we point to differ so greatly from conventional expectation and even from standard, paradigmatic "professional knowledge." Yet every effect can not only be immediately tested in your own experience, by you, but can be accounted for by the very principles and natural laws upon which our culture's professionals base their precepts and practice. They just had not yet thought them through to that point.

Beyond general use and beyond adult lay readers and independent students: to the professionals reading this book, there are not only all those immediate personal tests by which you can validate what this book says: there are hundreds of obvious specific formal tests waiting, no begging, to be run at the levels both of theory and practicum, hundreds of ways immediately ready for you to perform highly original research of profound human significance and benefit, and to make history. Beyond that, we have directed portions of this discussion also to educators and clinicians most of whose students, patients and case loads have no responsible choices of their own in the matter, no other real opportunity or hope of meaningful progress as human beings unless you provide it to them. Whatever your current reasons for serving in your profession, please reflect upon some of the original motivations which brought you there hopefully some of those motivations, at least, relating to a desire to help human beings and to make a meaningfully positive difference in their lives.

Beyond that, I hope that we have intriqued--or at least irritated into activity--a few people of a more scientific bent, who will begin looking deeper into these matters if only in hopes of finding some way to prove us wrong. (As you get into this, you will find wonderfully larger targets to prove wrong than these humble efforts! --And whatever you turn up will at least advance the field.)

Academic, professional and scientific games aside: here we are. Here are some ways to improve both your own condition and experience and those of others whom you care about. The human stakes are in fact huge. --And frankly (here we are addressing all our readers again, not only professionals): not many professionals will be motivated or bother to address even these obvious points, much less the universe-full of effects which waits beyond them, unless you bother to begin making some improvement in your own life and, perhaps and hopefully, in the lives of others around you.

Do not get multiple copies of this paper or the book Breakthroughs to pass around until and unless you have verified its most obvious points in your own experience and in your own life. I do not wish to add to the load of other people's second-hand "knowledge." Only your own experience can determine if what this book offers is good enough to share with others. What difference in your life has starting and maintaining a "Portable Memory Bank" made by now? How many "sidebands" of your awareness have you captured yet and how intriguing were the contents of at least a few of them? How much Image-Streaming have you let into your life yet and what has it shown you? Do the reasons for performing these and related practices make sense to you?

Ask your faculties that, and record onto tape (or describe to a live partner) in detail the imagery which comes up, allowing that imagery's contents to be a surprise to you.

Applying these practices and their extensions to practical creating and solution-finding:

What has enabled Project Renaissance to integrate so many perceived relationships and so many useful uses, from both old and new discoveries about the human mind and brain, was and is our use of another "principle," the Principle of Reinvesting Methods--

--A superb use of a good method for solving problems (and there were some pretty good such methods even to start with!), is on the problem of: how to create better methods for solving problems! A superb use of these, in turn, is on the problem of how to create even better such methods!....

--Pursue this simple principle long enough and strongly enough and after awhile, you are bound to find some very interesting things! We have! --Not through any virtue on our part, just the benefits of pursuing this simple principle. This pursuit has integrated, and continues to integrate, key new understandings, not only great new applied methods. Each new discovery brings with it a new and larger context into view, from which fresh questions to ask become apparent in pursuit of this simple principle.

Our "sine qua non" of understandings and applications at the present moment is the Beyond Einstein Training. By arrangement with Project Renaissance, this training, in part or in whole, can be professionally delivered anywhere in the world. The most such trainings thus far have taken place in Europe, North America, and in parts of Southeast Asia.

In our conviction that such resources should be as widely available and accessible as possible, a special manual and set of instructional, mostly guided experiential, audio tapes is now under preparation, to become a main form of the Beyond Einstein Training even more widely available than is the professional training, and with the highest possible quality. This audio tape package version of the Beyond Einstein Training is due to be published by Project Renaissance and released in October, 1994.

On the educational end, we have ventured the Compendium of Enhanced Learning Techniques (CELT), an encyclopedia of methods which are substantially better than those in prevailing practice, an encyclopedia intended to become wholly accessible between covers or online in every library throughout the world. CELT will review every such method it can find, provide its source, summarize its theory or rationale, summarize and analyze Consumer's Guide-like such research data as is available on it, and provide operational instructions how to perform, step by step, that particular method or technique. Since its inception in 1985 CELT's review task has grown, from the expected several hundred techniques from around the world to several thousand. It is our hope that every human being will have clear, easy access to and ready use of all of these. At this writing CELT remains unfunded, but the publication of eight major families of accelerated learning technique, in Beyond Teaching And Learning, even though all those techniques are from Project Renaissance, makes that book the first to be published in some form of association with that project. If interest picks up we should soon be able to publish at least a few volumes of such techniques and methods from additional sources.

Applications already available--

1) Applying these and related practices to very high orders indeed of creativity-building and problem-solving: the book liked so well by Success Magazine, our A Method For Personal Growth & Development.

2) Applying these and related practices to seven major types of accelerated/enhanced learning method other than, and very different from, accelerated and/or enhanced learning systems published elsewhere: our best book to date, Beyond Teaching And Learning.

3)Applying only Socratic Method in modern form, without any Einsteinian or visionary aspects, can still yield outstanding classroom results when incorporated with almost any ongoing method of teaching. Our quickbook on this is How To Be A Better Teacher, Today--While REDUCING Your Workload!

4)Of related interest, but from different principles addressing the overall health and functioning of the physical brain, and reworking the subroutines of the brain to better support its higher functions: our book How To Increase Your Intelligence.

5)Applying mostly Einsteinian and advanced Einsteinian processes (you supply the Socratic aspects!) to a wealth of sophisticated forms of solution- and answer-finding techniques: by Sidney J. Parnes, Visionizing: State-Of-The-Art Processes for Encouraging Innovative Excellence.

6)Delineating much of the context in which we live and struggle: our two-volume study of human civilizations and social dynamics as expressions of general systems theory. Vol. 1: Civilizations and Other Living Systems. Vol. 2, with the first publication anywhere on the field of sociotectonics, Toward A General Theory of Systems: One Man's Window On Our Universe. At least we have some idea of what we are doing in (we hope responsibly) inserting use of these techniques and resources into the closing days of 20th Century global western civilization.

To be released in the summer of 1994:

Applied to innovation, invention, design, enterprise, and to scientific inquiry: Techniques: Of Original, Inspired Scientific Discovery and of Technical Invention.

Inquire to learn the current status and availability of these and of approximately sixty other relevant titles, and of the Beyond Einstein Training, to: Project Renaissance, 301/948-1122 or Box 332, Gaithersburg, MD 20884-0332 U.S.A.

However: by far the best and richest resource of all is what your very own between-ears faculties will show you, if you give them the chance to do so. Let's have a look at some of that resource this very day!

---------------------------------- -----------------------------
Copyright 1993, 1994 by Win Wenger, Ph.D., Project Renaissance, 301/948-1122, Box 332, Gaithersburg, MD 20884-0332. This paper may, however, be freely reproduced--in whole to preserve context, but not in part--to share with persons whom you care about.

To reach Win Wenger, please visit his website at Project Renaissance.

New information on the latest Double Festival is available here.

This version originally published on Anakin's Brain (now Genius By Design)