Scientific proof for emotional vibrations

Originally Posted by inavalan

These electrocardiograms suggest that positive feelings (appreciation) exhibit lower frequencies than negative feelings (anger).

I guess, the "higher vibration" is just a figurative expression.

Something that makes sense at last. An approximation of the power should be possible.

As this concept of "raising vibrations" is metaphorical I can't believe that a hypothesis could be developed. I've asked often what it means but no one has offered an answer that could be researched.

Originally Posted by LiberatedLotus

Every emotion serves a purpose and should be embraced. We live in a world where "happiness" is the objective....

Yet, in a society of "happy" people we have the highest levels of pharmaceutical/drug abuse, suicides, violence, dysfunctional relationships, self-hate, low self-esteem, mental/emotional "illnesses" & imbalances, disillusionment, escapism, etc....

This is either due to our lack of understanding of happiness or what it's derived from/pursuits thereof, of other emotions, our relationship with them, or our ability to analyze & utilize them.

When you find a sound mind it is one that has embraced and conquered all emotions. They know how to analyze them, work with them, and build upon them.

They don't run away from them or avoid them.

Defining 'happiness' would be difficult enough. Like the word 'love' it has no universal benchmark. Everyone has different ideas - yet it would be necessary for any scientific research. You need data and surveys are notorious misleading - no use asking people how they define happiness because their answers won't produce an actual measure. Shrinks believe they've nailed it on several occasions but along comes another to show that they haven't.

I have little to do with emotions. I can feel happiness / disappointment but they're starting points guiding what to do next. Emotions are baggage and at the root of most of the world's woes.
.

[FallingLeaves]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

Something that makes sense at last. An approximation of the power should be possible.

As this concept of "raising vibrations" is metaphorical I can't believe that a hypothesis could be developed. I've asked often what it means but no one has offered an answer that could be researched.

vibration is a rate of oscillation... of something. it isn't the idea of vibration that is nebulous, it is a question of what the something that vibrates is? In our technology we most often use vibration in radio waves and so forth, but that doesn't mean it can't be used elsewise... for example vibrations in liquids are sometimes used to clean electronic parts...

'raising' vibrations means vibrating faster... higher frequency.... it is all well defined other than 'what' one would like to vibrate...

[HITESH SHAH]

Originally Posted by LiberatedLotus

Every emotion serves a purpose and should be embraced. We live in a world where "happiness" is the objective....

Yet, in a society of "happy" people we have the highest levels of pharmaceutical/drug abuse, suicides, violence, dysfunctional relationships, self-hate, low self-esteem, mental/emotional "illnesses" & imbalances, disillusionment, escapism, etc....

This is either due to our lack of understanding of happiness or what it's derived from/pursuits thereof, of other emotions, our relationship with them, or our ability to analyze & utilize them.

When you find a sound mind it is one that has embraced and conquered all emotions. They know how to analyze them, work with them, and build upon them.

They don't run away from them or avoid them.

Yes,
Balanced and judicious use of emotions (especially devoid of personal selfishness and ignorance) is required and can result in long term well being. Of course life tests all these from diverse perspectives and one has to really look at it from holistic balanced sustainability point of view.

As a natural orientation positive feelings should get more time,attention and space than the negative ones and our energies be spent behind creative activities than destructive ones.

Originally Posted by FallingLeaves

vibration is a rate of oscillation... of something. it isn't the idea of vibration that is nebulous, it is a question of what the something that vibrates is? In our technology we most often use vibration in radio waves and so forth, but that doesn't mean it can't be used elsewise... for example vibrations in liquids are sometimes used to clean electronic parts...

'raising' vibrations means vibrating faster... higher frequency.... it is all well defined other than 'what' one would like to vibrate...

Ok, just to assure you I'm ok about vibration, being I'm immersed in audio and its electronics. You're the first person here to note that 'raising vibrations' is meant to imply frequency rather than amplitude.

Yes, it can be used elsewhere as long as it is a vibration, a frequency not a stream of aperiodic pulses. But raising one's vibrations assumes that the raiser knows the starting frequency they're at - and what they want to raise it to, which assumes they can relate the frequency to the state they want to reach - or do they want to raise the amplitude as well? Frequency is just one aspect - presumably strength is also relevant, the amplitude. No use raising your vibration if the power diminishes.

Hence it's easier to look on it as metaphorical started by the Beach Boys. What frequency is a good vibration?

They might just as well have said raise your level of wellbeing but it doesn't sound so scientific, does it?

.

[FallingLeaves]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

Ok, just to assure you I'm ok about vibration, being I'm immersed in audio and its electronics. You're the first person here to note that 'raising vibrations' is meant to imply raising frequency rather than amplitude.

Yes, it can be used elsewhere as long as it is a vibration, a frequency not a stream of aperiodic pulses. But raising one's vibrations assumes that the raiser knows the starting frequency they're at - and what they want to raise it to, which assumes they can relate the frequency to the state they want to reach - or do they want to raise the amplitude as well? Frequency is just one aspect - presumably the strength of it is also relevant, the amplitude. No use raising your vibration if the power diminishes.

Hence it's easier to look on it as metaphorical started by the Beach Boys. What frequency x amplitude is a good vibration?

They might just as well have said raise your level of wellbeing but it doesn't sound so scientific, doe it?
.

cool... you know then that really if you are calling a vibration a sine wave then anything that is periodic can be described as a grouping of such? Including an aperiodic sequence of pulses? So for any 'real' thing you want to build out of 'sine wave' vibrations you wouldn't just choose one frequency, you would carefully choose a group of 'related' frequencies and mold them together. And yes both frequency and amplitude matter...

Interestingly when you try to describe a 'square' wave as such, you have a large amplitude lowest frequency, and smaller amplitude higher frequencies. The lower frequency gives the approximate period and height of the wave, and the higher frequencies give it sharpness/detail. So it would seem that contrary to popular opinion if you want to build something the lower can matter much more than the higher in terms of giving it overall form... but really both are necessary if you intend to get a specific shape.

I was watching 'ancient aliens' last night and they had this guy who could move stuff with his mind... he described some things about what he felt about it then they ran tests while he was doing it... interestingly they said that while most people who meditate drop into the alpha or theta brainwave state (the resting state being beta) this guy had activity on all the brainwave states at the same time during the 'incidents'... the scientists hadn't seen that one before...

as far as what is 'good' ... it doesn't seem like anyone has studied that much beyond classifying a few brain waves. And even at that they would have apparently gotten miseleading results (in terms of psychokenisis) except for the case I just gave you... so one would have to experiment to get anywhere...

but it might not be easy to experiment with emotions even if one wanted to because everyone already knows which emotions one should feel and which ones one shouldn't feel (to be accepted in whichever social group they want to remain in)... so studying emotions in any objective way on the basis of the emotions themselves rather than on the social implications of having or not having them is somewhat impossible...

Originally Posted by iamthat

Two possible sources of such evidence:

The Secret Life of Plants - Peter Tompkins and Christopher Bird. I haven't actually read this, but my understanding is that they measured the electrical responses of plants to human actions and even thoughts, and found that negative actions and intentions caused stress in the plants whereas these plants were quite comfortable with positive actions and intentions.

The work of Masaru Emoto, who examined the effect of positive and negative thoughts and feelings on water. He is most famous for images of water crystals which take on harmonious patterns when subject to positive vibrations and disharmonious patterns in response to negative vibrations. Plenty of images available online.

Peace

There is also this article on the work of Emoto on the way emotions affect the crystal formation of freezing water:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/scie...water-1.574583

Originally Posted by Becomingauthentic

Hi,

I’m researching the concept of raising vibrations. I know that it is said that everything is made of energy and that all things vibrate at a certain frequency. However, when it comes to emotions such as love, happiness, gratitude, etc. having positive vibrations. vs the negative vibrations of hate, bitterness and anger, what scientific evidence is there that this is the case.

In other words, what proof is there that positive emotions have higher vibrations and negative emotions have lower vibrations?

Look forward to your answers.

I don't know of any such scientific proof of what you are saying. Often, terms get borrowed from one aspect/kind of discourse and used in another where they may take on a meaning different from the original. It seems energy and vibration are perhaps two such terms.

It can be said that all "things" are made of energy, and this is true in a certain .....IDK, 'scope'. Yet perhaps more fundamental than energy is information. Information is a conserved quantity, and energy may just be what we call that information as we play around with it within our consciousness, maintaining that conservation as we transform it within. We say all those forms are really made of energy, but perhaps more accurate might be to say that we create those forms within our consciousness based on the information we receive, and we transform it between things and events. From that viewpoint all those things 'out there' are more a result of a process of representing information within the mind/consciousness rather than things made up of something called energy independent of the observer. It is a process of representation of information within. With information being the root of both the forms and the processes of change (those ations) they go through as they trans-form between things. Hence the mass energy equivalence, how both mass and motion are 'made of' the same seemingly conserved and interchangeable substance we have noticed and given the name energy.

Vibration is one means in which information can be transmitted and received. For example one may vary the amplitude of the peaks based on 1 or 0 (in digital signals). The higher the frequency, the more peaks per unit time, and therefore the more opportunities to encode information. Perhaps not coincidentally, energy is related to frequency by Planck's constant, the higher the frequency, the more energy contained in the wave. So at higher rates of vibration we see that both more energy and more information can be transmitted. So the two are related in that way anyway.

All that said, as inavalan's graphs show you, a clear correlation between higher frequency and positive or negative emotions has not been found by scientific method, as far as I know anyway. I expect that correlation is more based on a conventional manner of speaking about emotions. However, there are some interesting things to day dream about in terms of the oscillation of waves (namely Schrodinger's wave), and how that information might be drawn out from it through resonance, with which those forms are created to represent our realities. But again not necessarily with higher frequency correlated to positive or negative emotions, maybe, but IDK.


.

Cymatics is also an interesting approach to study how sound frequency affects water or sand.

From the pattern that appear in this video we could say there is also a form of information transmitted.

I would just bypass what this guy is saying to simply watch this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6y5jRRPprgE

Another one on cymatics on sand with sounds like OM and AH.

There seem to have been in old Sanskrit a basic understanding of sound vibration affecting matter and their "alphabet"

To bad that with our modern alphabet we lost all this direct contact with basic meaningful sounds.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yw13...&pbjreload=101