Ryze Logo - Bimbo Whisperer

Is There Scientific Proof For Law Of Attraction? (Emma & Jay’s Debate)

A friendly, insightful look at the connection between quantum mechanics & Law Of Attraction.

Disclaimer: This isn’t a full guide to manifesting, it is simply a helper article to clarify one of the most misunderstood parts of the law of attraction.

“Dad, I’m fed up with this Law Of Attraction crap.”

Emma had been struggling lately. She wanted to win a modeling contract, but it went to someone else.

She tried selling her own NFTs, but didn’t break even on her investment.

She wanted to get a role in a movie, but hadn’t heard back since her audition.

So I figured I’d take her for a drive to Niagara Falls, since the beautiful scenery, cascading water, and fresh air always cheered her up.

It was quite the drive though, so I threw on some tunes until Emma felt like talking… which was apparently, now.

“Excuse me?”

“My life’s been trash lately, nothing’s working out, if Law Of Attraction was real, I’d be crushing it.”

“Well, I’m sorry you feel that way, but you know your mother and I have never forced our beliefs on you. You’re free to believe in whatever you want.”

“Grr! That’s such a cop-out!”

“How so?”

“Because you just don’t want to prove LOA exists with –like– real science and stuff.”

“Ah yes, ‘real science and stuff’, how dare I avoid that when talking to a sulking child who hasn’t gotten her way.”

“I just–” Emma started, but I interrupted her.

“–Ah-ah. I know, you just want rock-solid scientific proof that the law of attraction is real, and you want dear old Dad to single-handedly do all the thinking for you until you’re convinced LOA is real.”

“Well, when you put it that way it makes me sound like a jerk.” Her lip folded open into a pout.

“I’m aware.” My sardonic grin was rubbing a bit of salt in her wound but I couldn’t help myself. I’d long-ago taught Emma that if she wants to understand something she has to be relaxed, calm, and open-minded, not frustrated, sulky, or whiny.

“Dad! C’mon!”

“Alright, fine, but you better remember this when I’m old and decrepit!”

“Oh, but Daddy-o, I thought you’re manifesting eternal youth.”

“Smart-ass. Do you want to know if LOA is real or not? Because if you do, we only have time for sarcastic barbs from one of us.”

“Okay, fine, please tell me…

…I’d love scientific proof for this LOA thing.”

“Well first, let me ask you this: what is science?

What Is Science - Law Of Attraction

“Huh? It’s, like, labs and experiments and stuff. Math, logic, physics, biology, whatever.”

“Those are some aspects involved in science, yes, but what’s the process of science? Of creating scientific proof?”

“I don’t know, it’s like when you run experiments & calculations and end up proving some formula or result with rock-solid, total, undeniable conclusiveness. Or something.”

“You’re getting closer, but think about this list of things:

  • Knowing the earth is round
  • Running a 4-minute mile
  • Making a heavy metal craft fly
  • Holding thousands of songs in our hand

Do you know what hundreds, even thousands, of ‘educated’ scientists of their time said about each of these things?”

“Not really…”

“They all said –with a certainty often crossing into arrogance– that these things were ‘impossible.’ So if science is all about rock-solid, undeniable conclusiveness, why are many scientists massively wrong about so many things?”

“Um, er, I…”

“Do you know that ‘intellectuals’ and ‘doctors’ in the medieval ages would press a sacrificed puppy or kitten onto a tumor because they thought that cancer was a ‘ravenous wolf’ that would ‘feed off the sacrificed animal rather than the human patient.’?”

“You’ve got to be making that up.”

“Nope, check out the book ‘Quackery: A Brief History of the Worst Ways to Cure Everything’ by Dr. Lydia Kang.”

“Fine but they were dumb back then, science is smarter now.”

“Is it? Because the ‘smart minds’ back then were absolutely certain they were onto the truth and ‘doing the right thing’, and that attitude hasn’t really changed talking to many scientists today, as far as I can tell.

For example: One day scientists will publish a study saying that we evolved from apes. The next day, other scientists will publish a study saying we evolved from reptiles. On a third day, they’ll publish a study that says we evolved from neither.

It’s enough to make one’s head spin.

Most science experiments I’ve looked at have always boiled down to ‘strong evidence’ pointing one way, then it being disproved, followed by stronger evidence pointing another way.

This happens often, with science flip-flopping direction many times over many experiments over many years. Have you talked to a self-proclaimed ‘logical’, ‘science-person’ recently? How did it go?”

“Sort of. I’ve had exes in STEM who claimed to be ‘hyper-logical’, but to me they were mostly arrogant know-it-alls. I’ve had science professors who wouldn’t let anyone question or argue with the textbook, even when my classmates were asking good questions and making real sense.”

“This often happens because our society praises logic, science, and ‘provable’ math so highly.

Our society praises people who are seen to be ‘right’ and makes fun of those who dare to be ‘wrong’, for the most part.

So even seemingly ‘logical’ people end up abandoning truth-seeking and true logic in favor of a pretense of logic and whatever makes them ‘look good’ or ‘wins debates’ or makes them ‘appear to be right.’”

“Including many scientists who have fears, foibles, and flaws that cause them to write things off as impossible or to attack others’ work, I imagine.”

“Yes. A truly logical mind is an open-mind. If you encounter snap judgments, drastic assumption, and heavily agenda’d bias, chances are you’re not dealing with a very scientifically-minded person, at least for the moment.

True scientists aren’t just able to admit being wrong, they actively seek it out, because they care about finding the truth, not about being right. Thomas Edison conducted many experiments to get the lightbulb right and delivered his famous quote that went something like:

‘I’ve not failed 10,000 times. I have not failed once. I have succeeded in proving that those 10,000 ways will not work. When I have eliminated the ways that will not work, I will find the way that will work.’

To me, that’s the approach of a true scientist, and anyone who approaches things otherwise likely isn’t really seeking the truth properly.”

“So wait, are you saying most science-peeps are lying?”

“I’m not ‘saying’ anything, I’m mainly asking questions and making observations, so far at least.

I want to be sure you understand that for decades… science will say ‘for certain’ that Einstein was right about X, Y, and Z.

Then for decades after they’ll say ‘for certain’ that Einstein was wrong about X, Y, and Z. Science loves saying things ‘for certain’, but the thing most people don’t like to admit is…

…that science & math are often far less certain than they pretend to be. They’re often inadequate for explaining major truths about life.

And even when they do explain something, it often takes them years to prove something that poets, artists, or mystics already ‘knew’ and are benefitting from. Even comedians ‘get this’ stuff, often on deeper levels than many scientists may ever do.”

I then broke out into my best Bill Hicks impression as I quoted one of his stand-up routines:

“The world is like a ride in an amusement park, and when you choose to go on it you think it’s real because that’s how powerful our minds are. The ride goes up and down, around and around, it has thrills and chills, and it’s very brightly colored, and it’s very loud, and it’s fun for a while. Many people have been on the ride a long time, and they begin to wonder–

‘Hey, is this real, or is this just a ride?’ And other people have remembered, and they come back to us and say, ‘Hey, don’t worry; don’t be afraid, ever, because this is just a ride.’ And we… kill… those people.

‘Shut him up! I’ve got a lot invested in this ride, shut him up! Look at my furrows of worry, look at my big bank account, and my family. This has to be real.’

It’s just a ride– But we always kill the good guys who try and tell us that, you ever notice that? And we let the demons run amok… But it doesn’t matter, because it’s just a ride. And we can change it anytime we want. It’s only a choice. No effort, no work, no job, no savings of money. A choice, right now, between fear and love. The eyes of fear want you to put bigger locks on your doors, buy guns, close yourself off. The eyes of love instead see all of us as one.

Here’s what we can do to change the world, right now, to a better ride. Take all that money we spend on weapons and defenses each year and instead spend it feeding and clothing and educating the poor of the world, which it would pay for many times over, not one human being excluded, and we could explore space, together, both inner and outer, forever, in peace.” – Bill Hicks, Comedian

“OK, um, first thank you for that incredibly accurate Bill Hicks monolog, Mr. Savant, and secondly, what am I supposed to be getting from all this… that ‘science sucks hard’?”

“No, not at all…

Science is amazing, and I’m a fan of logic, reasoning, experimentation, & the scientific method.”

“Right, but you’re saying that science isn’t about undeniable conclusiveness like I thought?”

“You tell me.

Is math the path to all truth? Can it prove all the important parts of life? Is science all about undeniable proof & ego-riddled arrogance slamming down anyone who thinks differently?

Or is it about gentle, open-minded exploration and experimentation? Is one version of science better than the other? Is it a blend of both?

You tell me what science is to you, and then we’ll take the discussion forward from there.”

Emma’s mouth squinched to the side and her eyes rolled up the opposite direction, giving her a cute “I’m thinking” face.

I tapped my fingers on the steering wheel along to the beat of Taylor Swift’s ‘Shake It Off’ while I waited.

“To me science is…

…A practical, truth-focused approach to logical answers about the world supported by strong evidence & found through experiment.

Science Definition - Law Of Attraction

That’s why science can be wrong, or disagree, or change it’s mind over time, because even ‘strong evidence’ can be overturned with new information.

“Fair enough, but in your definition is there room for ego? Arrogance? ‘Absolute certainty?’ Heavy-handed declarations of what’s ‘possible’ or what’s ‘impossible?’ Total undeniable evidence, as you said?”

“I guess not.”

“Good. Because it sounds like in your definition, science must be open-minded to being wrong.

It sounds as if it’s open to an experiment only being ‘right for a short while’ until it’s disproved by even stronger evidence.

It sounds as if that when scientists say ‘it’s not humanly possible to run a four-minute mile’, or ‘we can’t build a city on Pluto,’ it may only be a few decades until their rigid, overly-certain declarations are proven wrong.

Am I understanding you correctly?”

“That’s the only reasonable approach to science I can think of. Anything else is just intellectual dick-measuring over ‘who is right’, just like my STEM-focused exes or my well-intentioned teachers at school, in my opinion.”

I opted not to reprimand Emma for her choice of language and continued on. “Ok, we’ll go with that then. But in that case, is it fair to ask for complete, total, and undeniable proof about Law Of Attraction?”

“Well, I mean, the fact that one plus one always equals two is complete and undeniable, right?”

One Plus One Equals Two? Science & Law Of Attraction

“Maybe. Russell and Whitehead published the Principia Mathematica and in it, it took them 762 pages of dense mathematical notation just to prove one plus one equals two. :

“That sounds insane.”

“Kind of, haha.

And besides that, you actually said that one plus one always equals two, but to properly verify that, we’d need to check whether one plus one equals two until the end of time, which we don’t have the tech to do, so all we can say for certain is one plus one equals two most of the time, so far.

On top of that ‘1’ isn’t an actual thing. ‘1’ isn’t an apple, or an orange, it’s an abstract concept that someone defined, and they use it to perform functions in ‘reality’, but again, ‘reality’ isn’t properly defined either.

Like, is reality a personal mental construct determined by your senses, and if so, then is reality perceived the same for everyone?

And even more importantly than all this, the realms of quantum physics we’re about to explore together may actually bring other parts of this into question.”

“Are you serious?”

“Yes. No. Probably not. But maybe. Potentially–

Look, I want to be clear, I’m not the world’s smartest scientist.

I’m just doing my best to answer your question about Law Of Attraction. And like a ‘true’ scientist, you may need to let go of some heavy assumptions you may have about math, nature, physics, and so on.

If you’re really interested in discovering the truth, assumptions can be major obstacles that prevent it.”

“So you’re saying I can’t even assume one plus one equals two?”

“Well, try not to get hung up on that specific equation, but, kind of.

What I’m really saying is that even math isn’t the rock-solid proof you’re so hungry for, even though most people who aren’t mathematicians assume it is.

You may want to check out Veritasium’s video called ‘Math Has A Fatal Flaw’, it talks about how there will always be ‘true statements’ that can’t be proven, and has fifteen million views last I checked.

It doesn’t necessarily mean that one plus one doesn’t equal two, but more that one should be a bit more careful trusting math to explain important or deep truths about life. One of my favorite quotes from it goes:

‘There is a hole at the bottom of math… we will never know everything with certainty. There will always be true statements that can’t be proven.”

Check out this interesting food for thought from a Quora post:

‘In modern quantum physics it’s commonly known that the closer we look at reality and our physical world, the more it seems as though nothing is actually here or ‘true’. A quantum particle has the ability to be existing and non-existing at the same time depending on if it is observed.

Things can be True, or False and ‘True and False.’ The closer we look at quantum particles, the more we see that everything is made of nothing. If everything is made of nothing then I would say 1 is nothing, and nothing + nothing is still equal to nothing. So therefore, 1+1=0.’”

“Er, so I can’t ask for total proof one-plus-one-equals-two-style?”

“Well, in your definition earlier, you said science is about seeking strong evidence but also being totally open to that evidence being overturned… even when we’re ‘sure’ we have the ‘right’ answers, correct?”

“Hmmm… I did say that, yeah.”

“So then what are you really asking for?”

“I don’t know. This is hurting my brain already.”

“Easy, relax, my sweet girl. I think I know what you’re getting at. What you’re really asking for is for…

‘The best insight science can offer regarding the law of attraction,’ yes?”

“Yeah! Thank you! See? You get me, you totally get me.”

“My pleasure. But I may have to challenge your thinking a bit before we proceed.”

“Don’t worry, I’m beauty and brains, I’m up for the challenge.”

“We’ll see.

And if you are, then ask yourself this:

why do you need scientific proof so badly?

Many people succeed in many activities without knowing the ‘science’ behind them. Many chefs cook masterful meals without knowing food science.

Many musicians create moving concertos without knowing music theory or the math behind sound frequencies.

Many ‘manifestors’ manifest wonderful lives for themselves without getting hung up on the ‘science’ of it all.

So wouldn’t it be better for you to simply apply yourself to practicing Law Of Attraction and manifestation, rather than wasting your childhood years –or this car ride– on scientific study?”

“Interesting question. I just want to know. I dunno. I haven’t really thought about why.”

“Could it be because recently your life hit a rough patch, and you’re looking for a scapegoat to blame?

Or could it be that you’re not great at ‘believing’ in things or trying out new ideas for yourself, so you want ‘science’ to do the heavy-lifting for you?

Could it be that you want LOA to be real and true, but an attitude of doubt and skepticism is easy and familiar so you stick to it rather than something more sincere?”


“Hey what?”

“Hey, those aren’t very flattering things to suggest.”

“I wasn’t trying to flatter, Em.

I thought you wanted the truth, which means asking ourselves the ‘hard questions’ sometimes, right?

And you still haven’t answered me, were any of my ideas the real reason you’re so ‘needy’ for scientific explanations all of a sudden?”

Emma’s shoulders deflated as she sighed.

“All of your ideas are right. I hate to admit it but my gut is screaming at me saying ‘he is right and you know it,’ so there. Fine. I admit it.

I have bad-faith motivations for even asking these questions. I’m frustrated and depressed and just want to poke holes in people’s chirpily optimistic Law Of Attraction crap.

Are you happy now, Dad?”

I almost laughed out loud at how absurd this all was, but I felt Emma would’ve assumed I was laughing at her.

It’d probably cause her to snap.

So instead I did my best to reassure her that I had her best interests in mind here.

“My darling, my entire heart is focused on helping you, but to get at the deepest truths in life isn’t a journey for the faint of heart, and it’s not for people who can’t even own their reasons for wanting knowledge.

I’m about to spend a tremendous amount of time and energy helping you with your dilemma, and I’m not going to invest all that for someone who can’t even admit the truth of why she’s so obsessed with ‘scientific proof’ all of a sudden.”

“Ugh, do you always have to be so infuriatingly… right? God!”

I chuckled. “Like I said earlier, I’m more than happy to be ‘wrong’, because it helps me get closer to truth, but… do you really want help from someone who’s constantly wrong instead, advising you?”

“Touche. Good point. Well, as annoying as it is, thank you, I guess.”

“My pleasure.

So… back to the topic at hand.

We agree on what science is, at least for our chat today:

Science is a practical, truth-focused approach to logical answers about the world supported by strong evidence & found through experiment.

And we agree you’re not seeking ‘undeniable proof’ of the law of attraction, (because conclusions from science are continually contradicted, overturned, and generally ‘bad’ at addressing life’s deepest questions & truths) and you’ll instead be satisfied with a fairly comprehensive summary of our most up-to-date science on the matter, yes?”


“Great, then let’s see how much we can help you out.

One small disclaimer though:

Scientific explanations are often long-winded, boring, or complex. I’ll do my best to simplify things, but that means I’ll be skipping a lot of important details, so if you really care about this stuff, you’ll have to google the scientific studies and find citations on your own, there’s plenty of them out there.”

Schrödinger Equation - Science And The Law Of Attraction

“What do you mean?”

“For example, I may quickly summarize the ‘double-slit’ experiment, and while it’s been replicated many times in many different scientific studies, there’s a lot of nuances to its discovery and the conclusions drawn from it, so my quick summary will skip a lot of details and citations, if you care about them, you’ll have to look them up and do your own research. Are you cool with that?”

“Yeah, yeah, I’ve got hands and a brain, I can google if I need to, I just know you’ll break things down easier for me, to at least get the ball rolling.

What’s this ‘double-slit’ thing you’re talking about?”

“The ‘double-slit’ experiment is a cornerstone of quantum mechanics, and referred to often because of its ground-breaking implications.”

“Wait, what’s the difference between quantum physics, and quantum mechanics?

“Quantum physics is a branch of science. Quantum mechanics is the set of principles that explain the behavior of matter and energy.”

“Oh, so quantum physics is the area of science that focuses on the principles of quantum mechanics.”

“You got it, though I, and many others, kind of use the terms interchangeably anyway.”

“Aight, I get it…

So the double-slit experiment is basically the bedrock of most quantum physics understandings?”


“Tell me about it, please.”

“A stream of ‘elementary particles’ (like photons or electrons –a beam of light– are fired through two very thin slits. Got it so far?”

“Sure, like firing a stream of tennis balls through slots in a wooden fence, right?”

“Basically. Plus, there’s a screen behind the fence that captures the ‘impact’ of the electrons. Anyway, if electrons are particles –or ‘balls’ as you say– the experiment should show the impact of those electrons on the other side in two straight lines on the screen, right?”

“Sure, two straight lines is the only place the particles could land, that’s how the slits would guide them.”

“That’s what everyone expected, but instead of two lines of impacts revealed on the screen, scientists instead saw a ‘graduated spread’ of impacts that they call an ‘interference pattern’, instead of two solid lines of particle-impacts.

And do you know what this pattern on the screen means?”

Double-Slit Experiment - Science & Law Of Attraction

“I have no idea… something weird is going on?”

“Hah, that’s one way to phrase it. It’s kind of what eleven-year old Alice thought when she was learning about the double-slit experiment too.

The ‘interference pattern’ is what you would get if you fired two bodies of water through the slits instead. It’s what you’d get if you fired waves (not particles) through the slits.

And the two waves would ‘blend together’ on the other side of the slit, creating ‘ripple impacts’ on the screen.”

“So the double-slit experiment proves that electrons are waves, not particles?”

“Sort of. Classical physics has long seen electrons as ‘particles’, but the double-slit experiment proves they must be waves, so science is now exploring particle-wave duality, and this particle-wave duality brings up all kinds of questions like ‘what is actually real?’, ‘is anything real?’ and ‘are we controlling reality by turning waves into particles?’

Because all this implies that there’s a ‘quantum world’ made up of waves and a ‘real world’ where all the waves have ‘collapsed’ into particles that we can measure, experience, and interact with.

The experiment also suggests that us human beings, through the act of measuring, perceiving, and interacting with things are ‘collapsing’ waves from the quantum world, into ‘real experiences’ here in the real world, literally creating our own reality, somehow.

We think. But science doesn’t really know why ‘measuring’ things collapses their wave-state into a particle-state instead.”

“Whoa. This got crazy deep, crazy fast.”

“Yep, but that’s what happens when you want to discuss the law of attraction, manifestation, and how it’s possible for the mind to create reality.

These aren’t exactly snack-sized subjects, hon.

The double-slit experiment by itself has been examined thousands of times from different angles and I can’t get into it all here, but if you want to know you may want to check out Veritasium’s YouTube again and watch ‘Parallel Worlds Probably Exist. Here’s Why’, or this summary called ‘If You Don’t Understand Quantum Physics, Try This!’ from Domain Of Science.”

“Fair enough.”

“Anyway, since this experiment, quantum mechanics now describes all ‘particles’ using a ‘wave function’, which treats everything as a wave that becomes a particle the moment it is ‘measured.’”


“Classical physics says that everything is made of ‘solid particles’ that are there when we’re not looking at them.

Quantum physics says nothing really ‘exists’ when we’re not looking at them. They’re just waves of probability, that ‘become real’ the instant they’re measured, observed, or interacted with.

The thing is, since we live in reality, we’re always measuring, perceiving, or interacting with things, so we’re continually ‘collapsing the wave functions’ and making things real just by paying attention to them.”


“Yeah, this is really the foundation of quantum mechanics and I’m doing a terrible job at explaining it, I apologize.

Let me try again.

When measuring something, whether it’s as small as an electron or as big as a galaxy, our particles (and the air particles) are ‘entangled’ with whatever we’re measuring.

This is called ‘environmental decoherence’, and it means that the cool ‘quantum nature’ of particles, that are ‘controllable’ by our consciousness, ‘disappears’ as soon as we put our attention on things, and those ‘waves’ instead become real, solid, particle-based experiences for us to… uh… experience.”

“Dad, you’ve explained censorship to me easily.

You’ve explained ‘communication’ to me easily

You’ve explained the blockchain-game Splinterlands to me easily–”

“–But I’m failing hard here, I know.

Em, I really wish there was a simple, easy explanation for these strange aspects of reality and quantum mechanics, I really do.

Look, let’s try this, take a quick look at Dominc Walliman’s Quantum Physics For 7-Year Olds.

The first half talks about how people feel guilty for ‘not understanding’ things, but how we can get our understanding back on track is by stopping the conversation and asking for further clarification.

He encourages us to ask questions and never feel bad for not knowing something.

He also emphasizes how important it is to explain things simply for others and the importance of ‘good science communication.’”

“OK, he definitely does get how hard it is for laypeople to understand science, but he also knows how to simplify and solve that. He actually started even simpler than you did. He said ‘quantum physics is the description of the smallest thing in our universe,’ even smaller than cells or atoms.

He says ‘quantum physics is the study of how these tiny things behave and operate,’ and it’s really important because the small things make up all the ‘big’ realities we experience. Quantum mechanics are the foundational rules of our universe, and they’re pretty weird rules.”

“Sure, but maybe that video wasn’t very helpful? It doesn’t explain the ‘quantum measurement problem’ I was trying to get at.”

“Well he talks about MRI machines, that might explain it?”

“Magnetic Resonance Imaging machines? I can’t recall, what did he say about them?”

“He said they make the tiny hydrogen atoms in our body ‘spin’ clockwise and counter-clockwise at the same time (which is a quantum behavior), and by doing that, they don’t really ‘exist’ anymore, which is how MRI machines can actually ‘see’ inside our bodies.

This is because we’re all made of ‘quantum stuff’ or something like that. Spooky, AF.”

“Yeah, it takes a bit to wrap your head around, but if you don’t understand this, you also won’t understand the ‘Observer Effect’, ‘Quantum Entanglement’, ‘Schrodinger’s Cat’, ‘Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle’, ‘Superposition’, ‘Decoherence’, and more.

And there’s tons of information out there on it, because quantum physics is one of the most understood, most successful scientific theories out there.

It’s helped us invent computers, lasers, digital cameras, nuclear plants, and more.

You —and everything around you— is made up of quantum particles and subject to the rules of quantum physics, even if we don’t realize it. Dr. Rosenblum and Kuttner emphasize that:

‘Quantum theory works perfectly; no prediction of the theory has ever been shown in error. It is the theory basic to all physics, and thus to all science…it is the most battle-tested theory in all of science. It has no competitors.’ – Rosenblum & Kuttner, Quantum Enigma: the Spooky Interaction of Mind and Matter.”

“Whoa, whoa, whoa, hold on a second, you just hit me with a hundred terms that make no sense. I’m lost.”

“I know, I did that on purpose, because quantum physics is basically an entirely new language, with words that describe entirely new things.

Anyone who doesn’t know the language will have a lot of trouble understanding anything useful.”

Quantum Physics Language - Science And LOA

“Great, you could’ve just told me you can’t answer my question about proving Law Of Attraction in the beginning and saved us a ton of time.”

“Now, now, don’t throw a fit. First of all, we have nothing but time on this drive, and secondly I am going to answer your question, it just might not be in the way you prefer. The truth isn’t always packaged in a nice little bow or a quick sound bite from an influencer…

Sometimes, to understand the truth you have to do real, honest, mental work. You have to put in effort.

You may even have to learn a new language.”

Emma folded her arms and jutted out her chin, giving me the silent treatment.

“Em, don’t be a spoiled brat. Understanding life and mastering the law of attraction can be a game-changer, but it may take actual mental effort. Can you get on board with that?”

“Fine. I guess so. If I wanted to code a game, I’d have to learn a programming language, if I want to reprogram my life, it makes sense I’d have to do the same thing.”

“Good. That’s more like it, now I can’t teach you all these terms here and now, you’ll definitely have to look some up, but I’ll do my best. Now, do you understand that unlike classical physics, which saw everything as solid, tangible particles, quantum physics sees everything as waves, in flux, which only become ‘real, tangible particles’ once someone (an observer) takes measure of them?”

“Yeah, while you were rambling I looked at the diagrams in that video you mentioned and it helped. I think I get it.”

“Good, because that is the ‘Observer Effect.’

And it’s the basis for how we ‘create our own reality.’ Can you tell me why?”

“Because when, how, and with what attitude an observer takes stock of any ‘wave’, influences whatever kind of particle they end up with?”

“Bingo. And since we’re observing waves/particles all the time, we’re constantly influencing what happens in reality, whether we realize it or not.”

“And that’s the basic science at the core of the law of attraction?”

“Yes, that’s a big part of it.

But quantum physics is a fairly new area of science, and it’s not fully proven, and there’s lots more questions and active-research going on, and people are constantly trying to ‘poke holes’ in it or ‘dismiss’ developments in quantum science, just as science once did the same thing to people exploring airplane flight, the four-minute mile, and the earth being round.

Quantum physics’s connection with the law of attraction gets far more nuanced than I’ve explained here, and we can explore that if you like.”

“It sounds like there is a ‘but…’ implied here.”

“You’re right. I was going to say but…

…We can also approach LOA more from a ‘human psychology’ perspective instead of a physics-based one.

Psychology is less ‘solid’ and ‘law-based’ than physics but the patterns, trends, and conclusions that arise from scientific studies on the ‘Placebo Effect’, ‘Self-Fulfilling Prophecy’, ‘Streisand Effect’, ‘Victim Mentality’, ‘Psychological Reactance’, the ‘Pygmalion Effect’, ‘Perverse Results’ and more point very strongly towards evidence for Law Of Attraction.

It’s also easier for many people to grasp.

I can cite substantial studies into the power of how visualization helps athletes win contests better than those who refuse to visualize, and most people tend to ‘get it’, so it might be an easier path for you to see the proof of Law Of Attraction you asked for.”

“Hmm, but visualization doesn’t work for everyone, and it’s not totally reproducible, and we don’t know exactly how it works, it’s just a bunch of studies that show correlation, right?”

“Oooh, my daughter tossing around intellectual words like ‘correlation’, bravo.”

“Shush Dad, just because I say ‘like’ and ‘whatever’ sometimes doesn’t mean I don’t have a brain.”

“I wouldn’t dream of saying otherwise, Emma.

And you’re right, like I said, psychology’s proof for law of attraction is a bit ‘less science-y’ to some people, or less ‘solid’ than the evidence that can come from physics, since physics deals with the ‘laws’ of nature, the physical world we experience, and the universe, whereas human psychology deals with the ‘black box’ of how people think, which we can’t really test and measure very accurately, at least compared to physics-based stuff.

That said, although visualization was seen as ‘new age hype’ for decades, research has shown a strong scientific basis for how and why visualization works.”

“So visualization is one LOA technique that is scientifically proven?”

“Pretty much. It’s now a ‘well-known fact’ that we stimulate the same brain regions when we visualize something and when we actually experience that same thing.

There’s an interesting video about Connor McGregor’s visualization techniques on ‘Mastery Blueprint’ on YouTube, and hearing his coach talk about it may interest you. Similar applies to Michael Phelps for winning his numerous gold medals in swimming.

The most impressive use of visualization may be done by free-climber Alex Honnold.

You could try and tell any of these massively impressive performers in their field that the law of attraction is false and visualization doesn’t work, but you’d just be a voice in their ear, while they have years of masterful performance primed by visualization arguing otherwise.”

Visualization Science And Law Of Attraction

“Well then, how come my experience with visualization has sucked?

I visualized getting that modeling contract and that audition, and I got nothing.”

“Oh my sweet girl, I know you want the answer to be ‘the science is wrong’, ‘the studies are wrong’, ‘the athletes are wrong’… but that’s just not it.

You got no results because your visualization isn’t up to their level.

You haven’t practiced it enough.

You don’t do it with a wholesome attitude.

Your mind is littered with doubt, cynicism, and skepticism.”

“What’s wrong with that? It’s normal to doubt and be skeptical.”

“I know my love, it is normal.

But the people you look up to, and the people who succeed are not normal.

They’re the opposite of normal, and they do ‘not normal’ things, such as releasing their attachment to doubt, cynicism, and skepticism.

They’re open-minded and eager to give things the ‘old college try’, they’re eager to experiment, and if it doesn’t work, they’re eager to experiment again, see if they went wrong somewhere, and blame no one for their failures.

They’re not looking to blame others, or blame science, or blame the law of attraction…

…they’re just applying themselves, practicing, and actively refining their approach til they get results.

They don’t sulk, they don’t demand answers from science, they experiment with a healthy attitude, and become their own scientists.

They discover subtle quirks of visualization that others don’t know, they even explore contradictory evidence for themselves by reading articles like ‘Throw Away Your Vision Board‘ by Neil Farber M.D, Ph.D…

…but often rather than discouraging them from visualization, it only makes their visualization practice even better. Can you honestly say you’ve been approaching your visualization with similar ‘not normal’ fervor?”

“Dang. Wow. I mean… I want to say ‘yes,’ but I’m obviously not.”

“Exactly, and the same goes for almost everyone whining about the ineffectiveness of visualization or the invalidity of the law of attraction. They’re usually people with poor attitudes, narrow minds, and ridiculously poor practice habits and personal experimentation.”

“I’m starting to see that, but honestly Dad…

…You sound kind of biased against LOA-haters yourself.”

“Owch. You wound me, Em.” I quipped as I pulled off the main road into a McDonald’s parking lot.

“Well, you have been pretty hard on me and anyone else who’s not a ‘true scientist’ in their approach to life.”

“True, but it’s not because I’m biased against them, I was one of them.

I was arrogant, conceited, entitled, skeptical, cynical, bitter, resentful, self-righteous, close-minded, and more.

Most cynics are not focused on value, they’re not focused on taking life forward.

At least most I’ve encountered aren’t, including younger me.

‘What is a cynic? A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.’ – Oscar Wilde

Although my parents were amazing, somehow I’d picked up a pretty terrible mindset for most of my childhood, and I was that way to an extreme degree.

It left me homeless, isolated, broke, depressed, and suicidal.

And what got me out of that dark pit was putting my assumptions away and adjusting my approach to life.

I was still my logical self, and I still had a ‘healthy skepticism’, but my attitude was now much gentler, I spoke less in absolutes, I embraced gray areas, I admitted that math, science, and logic might not know everything, or even a lot, about how to navigate life successfully.

I began applying myself to more practical experiments in my own life and trying ‘crazy things’ like ‘giving up’, ‘letting go’, ‘embracing death’ and other things I’d been railing against most of my younger years.

I stopped caring about appearances and began caring more about what my gut, instincts, and conscience were guiding me toward.

I cared more about choosing my actions out of love, rather than fear.”

“And most doubt, skepticism, and cynicism have roots in fear.

Yeah, got it, I see where you’re going with this.”

“Not all, but a lot, yes. And since I’ve been the hyper-logical type for decades, and I’ve been the intuitive spiritual type for decades, I’ve now realized there is merit to both sides, and being at all closed or resistant to either is really just putting oneself at a disadvantage in life.

I’m not biased against LOA-haters, I just feel it’s important to emphasize the importance of open-mindedness on either side of the ‘is LOA real’ issue, and discourage any form of dogma, ‘scientific’ or otherwise.”

“Understood, in discussions like this, I can see why you’d harp on about open-minded vs. close-minded…

…but can we get back to the quantum physics stuff? It was actually pretty interesting.”

“Sure, watch this while I pull into this McDonald’s and, uh, use the facilities.” I texted Emma a link to Dean Radin’s most comprehensive experiment results in his video New Experiments Show Consciousness Affects Matter ~ Dean Radin, PhD.

“Cool, I’ll check it out, do you mind bringing me some chicken nuggies?”

“Of course it’s my pleasure, Em,” I said as I exited the car and started towards McDonald’s. “We’ll continue our chat when I get back and discuss Einstein, Consciousness, and Parallel Worlds.”


I accidentally slammed the door a bit too hard when I got back to the car, but Emma was too excited to even comment on it.

Instead she gushed about the video she’d just watched.

“Wow, Dad, that video was intense! He started at the double-slit experiment, dug deep into the observer effect and problems in quantum measurement, and more. I could tell he was trying to make it simple, but since I don’t know the ‘language’ of quantum mechanics, it was super complex.”

“Oh, so you didn’t like it?”

“No, I just mean, I normally can’t sit through boring science stuff like that, but I guess I’m so hungry to know if our consciousness really does control our reality, I was motivated to give it a chance.

Paraphrasing Radin, ‘Everyone offers theories about consciousness but few real, solid, rigorous experiments are actually done.’

Emma took the chicken nuggets I was offering as we talked.

“Yes, it’s definitely interesting and seems to be fairly rigorous scientific experiments and testing, right?”

“Totally!” Emma’s enthusiasm was the perfect note for us to get back on the road, so I hit the gas.

“Well, be careful, the whole point of this conversation isn’t that classical physics is ‘right’ or quantum physics is ‘right’ or that Dean Radin is ‘right.’

The whole point isn’t for you to take some other person’s work or ideas as gospel, it’s for you to think things through for yourself, and more importantly…

Experiment well for yourself, in your own life.

I’m cherry-picking videos and resources that lean heavily towards ‘believing’ in the law of attraction and the impact of consciousness on reality.

Some of the videos have religious agendas, monetary agendas, ego-driven agendas, and more.

They may be enlightening, or off-putting. They may be right about some things, but there’s also plenty of stuff out there that will say that’s ‘not real science’, or everything I’ve shown you is all conjecture from ‘quacks.’

There’s lots of people out there discrediting people’s ideas, sometimes with noble intentions, sometimes out of knee-jerk insecurities.”

“Any examples?”

“Well, there’s countless books and videos that explore opposing views. A fun example might be this entire reddit thread where people say quantum mechanics proves nothing about consciousness’s place in life.

There are other people in the same thread quoting many famous physicists who say otherwise.

You’re going to find lots of ‘smart’ people arguing that ‘their view’ is ‘right’ and everyone else is wrong.

And then there’s another reddit thread discussing the validity of the debate in the first reddit thread.

Which side is right? Which philosophy is right? Which science is right? Who’s science was ‘most precise’, ‘most fair’, ‘most rigorous?’ Can science even really say anything about consciousness, reality, manifestation, or law of attraction?

Does it even matter?”

‘Consciousness is a fascinating but elusive phenomenon. It is impossible to specify what it is, what does, or why it evolved. Nothing worth reading has been written on it.’ – Stuart Sutherland, International Dictionary of Psychology, 1989

Emma’s jaw hung open as I tore apart the resources I’d been offering her and questioned the validity of most arguments made by most scientists, but I just barrelled on.

“Radin’s earlier works have been criticized as ‘misreported’ or ‘loose’ or ‘unscientific’, so he responded by being even more precise and rigorous with his more recent experiments, so they might be reliable to form some conclusions from…”

“…or they might be falsified, mistaken, or overturned in a few years anyway. I see what you’re getting at.” Emma laughed, “I’m starting to see a pattern with all these ‘scientific discoveries.’”

“You know it…

So did Radin’s quantum experiments convince you that our consciousness creates our reality?

Or maybe this recent experiment proves that ‘extended networks of observers’ defines the structure of physical reality itself, or this one on the observer-affects-reality principle is good enough for you?

Or maybe they’re not.

Are they true? Accurate? Can we dismiss these experiments out of hand? How about when we compile them together with countless other experiments showing similar things?

“Well that Radin video kind of did, and it looks like it convinced most of the 3,800 commenters too, judging by the comments.

It seems that quantum physics shows us that there’s an important place for consciousness (and mind-over-matter) in science, because consciousness is actually the metaphysical basis of everything, the extra-physical ‘observer’ that turns all the ‘wave realities’ we can’t experience into ‘particle realities’ we can…

…even though some people don’t realize it or admi it.”

“Indeed, that does seem to be the case. Though you’ll always find someone who dismisses results like this for one reason or another.

Most famously, Einstein was not a fan of today’s quantum physics, saying:

‘God does not play dice with the universe.’

“Yo! Are you saying Einstein was a quantum-mechanics hater?”

“Yes and no.

Einstein won a Nobel Prize for his work on the ‘photoelectric effect’ — a phenomenon that helped develop quantum mechanics.

But despite helping develop quantum mechanics, Einstein didn’t like the idea of every particle not being real, and instead being ‘random waves’ that we as observers control.

He believed we can calculate both the speed and position of particles, definitively, the observer-effect be damned.

He did not believe in the existence of ‘superposition’, where particles exist in multiple states at once, and can’t be measured properly, only becoming measurable particles once some ‘observer’ has put attention on them.”

“But the video I just watched was really, really convincing and everyone in the comments seemed to agree.”

“Just so.

And here we are, years after Einstein’s death, and there’s not a shred of evidence of the ‘definitive measurement law’ that Einstein hoped for, and all experimental evidence suggests that quantum mechanics is, well, real.

So Einstein was probably, um, wrong about this.

“Well, nice to know he was human, I guess.”

Are We In The Matrix? Science And LOA

“As are we all.

Everything I’m telling you here could, technically, be overturned tomorrow.

It wasn’t just Einstein who didn’t believe in quantum mechanics, entire scientific groups like ‘Reductive Materialists’ and ‘Classical Physicists’ say there’s no place for consciousness (or mind-over-matter) in science.

They’ll use scientific dismissals such as ‘falsified results’ ‘too many standard deviations,’ or disbelief in apparent ‘5-sigma results and z-scores,’ and on and on.

They’ll dismiss things such as this quote:

‘When we compound the statistics from the several independent findings, we compute a bottom line deviation of more than 5 sigma, representing evidence for structure where there should be none in the random data.

We think this carefully established anomaly relating consciousness and physical randomness bears implications for both the study of human consciousness and our understanding of the physical world.’

From a paper called: Mind Matters: A New Scientific Era by R. Nelson with a wave of their hand.”

“Um, hello? Was that English?”

“I’m not really sure, myself, haha. Basically it’s an example of how formal, intellectual scientist’s argue. One says they found ‘5-sigma’ proof that consciousness creates reality, another dismisses those 5-sigma results, basically saying ‘You Done Effed Up Your Experiments, Foo’.”

“Oh, so 5-sigma results just means ‘major proof’, or something?”

“Yep, and 6-sigma is even more reliable proof.

And it usually takes a lot of work to produce such levels of proof, and Nobel Prizes can be awarded for new or groundbreaking 5-sigma results.

But even when those results are produced, other scientists may still take issue with them. And maybe they’re right to do so.

But like I said before, ‘out-of-hand dismissals’ isn’t the mark of an open-minded, truth-seeking scientist, so be careful if you see any of the YouTube comments hand-waving someone’s life work and experimental research away.

And like I also said, I told you I’d provide you with ‘the best science has to offer’ on law of attraction.

Well, there aren’t a whole lot of well-crafted (or well-known) experiments on the nature of consciousness or it’s effects on quantum mechanics, and even less that are walked through clearly on YouTube, so… you might as well explore it for yourself.”

“Thanks, I appreciate it, I never would’ve found any of this stuff on my own, no matter how long I googled.”

I grinned, it always feels good to receive gratitude from my daughter. “Ok, so what are your takeaways?”

“Well, I learned that since all particles are also waves, and so every particle of the universe hasn’t really been ‘decided’ whether it’s moving fast or slow, heavy or light, what flavor it is, etc. until it gets ‘observed’ somehow.

This is what science calls a particle being in a ‘superposition’ state, as in, it doesn’t have a set position in reality yet, because it’s like a wave in the ocean, existing in many states at once.

I learned that the reality I’m used to isn’t really real until I observe it or perceive it or measure it.

When a wave gets ‘measured’ or ‘observed’ or ‘interacts with any environment’ it becomes a particle, this is called ‘decoherence’ and it’s through decoherence that quantum probabilities or quantum realities become actual realities that we experience.

This can even happen over large distances, because of ‘quantum entanglement’, and it may play a role in the power of prayer, mind-over-matter, or even unexplained psychic phenomenon!”

“Oho! Now who’s using a bunch of whacked-out science terms that aren’t english?

“What do you mean? I thought I explained that pretty well, no?”

“Sure, for me, but pretend you’re talking to someone who hasn’t seen any of the videos! They’d be clueless.

They’d be lost as soon as you mentioned ‘quantum entanglement, for example.

Do you even know what that is?”

“We-ell, I’ma be honest, the video you sent me confused me, so I did some of my own research and found a video called ‘What Can Schrödinger’s Cat Teach Us About Quantum Mechanics?’ by Josh Samani on the TED-Ed channel, and that helped a lot.”

“See? Even you got lost! So, your explanation would definitely confuse others.”

“Ah, true, that’s my bad.

But I’d just tell them what you told me, if you want to discuss this stuff, you better learn the language first.

I’d tell them to google ‘superposition for kids’, ‘quantum decoherence for beginners’, ‘quantum entanglement for quick summary’, or whatever else I could think of to help them learn the terms.”

“Very wise, Emma. And in case that ever does happen, most people don’t even know what to look up or where to start, so I often point them to The Map of Quantum Physics on the Domain Of Science YouTube channel.

It’s a fun, friendly list of most key terms and concepts involved in quantum science & computing, with super-quick summaries of each, and it’s a great starting point if people don’t know what to look up, even though it’s not very law of attraction focused.”

“Great! And speaking of which…

I’m starting to get how quantum physics ties into the law of attraction.”

“I’m glad. And what is your summary?”

“Everything is made of tiny particles, atoms, protons, electrons, quarks, and so on.

Each of these particles have a certain ‘energy’, too. Anyway, the universe is an elegant system, because everything we’ve ever experienced is made up of these tiny particles.

They’re like the ‘lego’ building-blocks of reality.

Basically, these tiny particles are literally what ‘manifests’ as our experiences.

But there’s something extra special about each of these particles… they’re not actually particles.

Instead, they’re waves of probability that we, as humans with consciousness, can influence through our attention.

It’s our attention that ‘particlizes’ them or ‘realizes’ them.

So literally… our focus, attention and attitude towards things influences every wave/particle in them towards either being something we desire, or something we don’t desire.

Our attention, acting upon tiny ‘wave-particles’ and energies (‘quanta’) heavily influences the manifestation of different things.

I once read an Eckhart Tolle quote that said:

“You are the universe, expressing itself as a human for a little while.”

So, we’re all made up of same ‘energy’, ‘matter’, ‘stardust’ or whatever that manifests galaxies, stars, suns, life, consciousness, and once we realize this, we can tune our consciousness more and more towards joy and love, resulting in a life experience that reflects more and more joy and love.”

“Bravo!” I slapped my knee with genuine glee Emma had summarized the connection between quantum physics and the law of attraction quite well for a teenager.

“Yeah, all these video resources you’ve sent me are a lot of food for thought, but I can see how ‘stronger and stronger evidence’ is ‘pointing towards’ the law of attraction being real.”

“Right, but do you also see how human science, math, and physics aren’t really adequate in their current state to actually prove it once and for all? Do you see how you, or anyone, asking for ‘proof’ has missed the point of how life’s deepest truths work?”

“I do. But I’m starting to feel it might be ‘enough proof’ for me. At least enough for me to give it more than a shot than my sulky whining and half-hearted visualizations earlier. I’m starting to think this stuff is worth actually practicing, because there seems to be some pretty substantial scientific exploration of it going on.”

“I’m glad to hear it.

The ‘Placebo Effect’ alone is a topic of huge interest and debate in scientific circles, and also responsible for some pretty ‘miraculous’ improvements in certain people’s lives.

Some scientists, like Dr. Joe Dispenza, swear the placebo effect is a powerful tool for reality creation, others swear it’s hogwash.

Either way, it sounds like it has crazy potential and I’m honestly surprised more people aren’t exploring that for themselves as a starting point.”

Placebo Effect, Science, And Law Of Attraction

“Yeah, the only people I know who’ve tested it for themselves are people in hospitals with untreatable diagnoses, so they start playing with mind-over-matter, because, what else can they do?”

“I hear ya on that

I’d love to see more people trying their own Law Of Attraction experiments. I’d like to see people testing to see if their consciousness affects reality, the same way kids test whether or not pedaling fast keeps their bike balanced, or copywriter’s test one headline over another.”

“Well I tested that already this week and they all failed.”

“I mean, those are pretty ambitious tests, miss. When you’re dipping your toe into the realms of quantum physics and law of attraction, maybe start with smaller tests?”

“Like what?”

“Well if you really want to try, you could check out a book called E-Squared: Nine Do-It-Yourself Energy Experiments That Prove Your Thoughts Create Your Reality by Pam Grout. It’s not the be-all-end-all on the subject but it’s a great way to get your feet wet for beginners.

There’s also some ‘muscle testing’ experiments you can play with in the book Power vs. Force: The Hidden Determinants of Human Behavior by Sir David R. Hawkins, M.D., Ph.D.”

“Awesome! I’ll Amazon it, easy-peasy!”

“Lovely. Now they’re both fairly light reading, and doesn’t go too deep into the quantum mechanics of things, so if you want to go hardcore into that stuff, you’ll want to explore the complex works of early quantum mechanics founders such as:

Bohr, Heisenberg, Schrodinger, Max Born, Planck, Jodan, Pauli, Zeilinger, and Dirac.

Or you can get more recent with works by people such as von Neuman, Wigner, Wheeler, Stapp, Penrose, Kafatos, Stephen Barr, Feynman, Rosenblum, & Kuttner.

Actually another good starting place might be ’Something Deeply Hidden’, an intriguing book by Prof. Sean Carroll.

He may rely too heavily on the ‘many worlds’ interpretation of quantum physics, but still, worth a read.

You could also explore Reality Transurfing by Vadim Zeland, Becoming Supernatural by Dr. Joe Dispenza or The Mind and the Brain: Neuroplasticity and the Power of Mental Force by Jeffrey M. Schwartz & Sharon Begley.”

“What do you mean by ‘many worlds’ interpretation?”

“Well, remember how tiny quantum particles can be ‘many things’ at once, because they’re waves with their properties in ‘superposition’?”


“Well the ‘many worlds’ interpretation sees this to mean that every particle in our body creates infinite branching possibilities, every time we make a choice.

This is why some LOA-fans believe we’re all living in our own virtual realities, creating infinite branching paths of what we want to happen.

They believe we’re channel-hopping from one reality to another every second without noticing it, so we can eventually channel-hop to the reality where we’re president, or have a harem, or are obscenely rich, if we keep using our consciousness and beliefs correctly.”

“Well, from what I’ve learned about quantum physics, that’s not so implausible.”

“Maybe, maybe not.

German-American astrophysicist Bernard Haisch had this to say about the ‘Many Worlds’ interpretation:

‘One tiny atom’s quantum behavior replicates the entire universe and defines each alternative by all the possible consequences of that behavior. But at any moment, within each human body, there are on the order of a billion times a billion atoms, each making quantum transitions. In the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, every human being, therefore, creates a billion times a billion times a billion alternative universes every second. Multiply that by the billions of humans on the planet…’ – The God Theory, Bernard Haisch

Still sound plausible?”

“Errr, no? Yes? Maybe? I don’t know.” Emma’s eyes grew anime-wide with a deer-in-headlights look.

“That’s the point.

The human mind has trouble grasping such insane infinite possibilities, and on top of that, it sounds kind of dumb. Like, Occam’s razor says this would be horrendously complex, inelegant, and inefficient.

Would the universe really be designed this way?

Duplicating infinite worlds for every particle, in every body? Just so people can ‘control life’ and ‘manifest what they want’?”

“My brain’s starting to hurt again.”

“Yours, mine, and many other people’s. It’s why there’s multiple interpretations of quantum mechanics and the double-slit experiment.

Scientists are still proposing different things that might possibly explain these things like the ‘Copenhagen Interpretation,’ ‘Pilot Wave Theory’, ‘Quantum Bayesianism’, and more. But look… we’re here!”

We’d arrived at Niagara Falls, so I quickly found some pay-parking and Emma and I picked up our discussion in a much more scenic area than the interior of my vehicle.


The falls roared beside us as we walked along the boardwalk, flecks of water dotting our clothes and a mist hanging in the air.

“Dad, this was super helpful. I’d seen people asking for proof of Law Of Attraction on Reddit and stuff, and the answers were mostly shallow and unhelpful. They all gave me the impression that there is no proof.”

“And that’s essentially correct, there’s no ‘conclusive proof’ of the irrefutable kind most skeptics are so hungry for.”

“Right, but there is substantial, strong, noteworthy evidence pointing in the direction that Law Of Attraction is real, practical, and worth exploring with an open-mind.”

“That’s my take on it, and it sounds like it may be yours now as well, but I can’t stress this enough, you will encounter some pretty hard-nosed people who simply refuse to give it a chance, and they’ll claim their complete dismissal of Law Of Attraction is scientific.”

“I’m ready for ‘em, and I’m willing to bet anyone who is doing so has deliberately avoided conducting any open-minded manifestation experiments for themselves. Or at least any appropriate ones.”

“It’s possible you’ll find a ‘healthy skeptic’ somewhere, but in this radicalized, polarized society, triggered extremists are much more likely.”

“Speaking of triggered extremists…”

“Uh oh…”

Does Law Of Attraction Trigger You?

“Well what about people who say Law Of Attraction is a scam, or B.S., or harmful to others?”

“What do you mean?”

“Well one lady wrote this LOA take-down blog that said stuff like…

‘Law Of Attraction dismisses medical conditions such as depression?’”

“Ah yes, I’ve heard stuff like this before.

It usually comes from knee-jerk reactions to a surface-understanding of Law Of Attraction and almost always someone who hasn’t done the work, maintained an open-mind, and refined their practice.

Remember when we were talking about athletes earlier, and how they visualize better performance?

Well, CEOs have done the same thing with their business successes, and similarly depressed people can and have made use of Law Of Attraction (not only visualization) to achieve a better mental state.

I can’t get too deep into it right now, but you may want to do your own research into what depression actually is, and think it through yourself, like a thought experiment.”

“I thought I was doing that?”

“Well, dig deeper into questions such as, have humans had emotions and thoughts since Neanderthal times?

If we have, did they have bleak survival thoughts back then? Were cave-men ever suicidal? Did they overcome it? How?

They didn’t have therapists, right? They didn’t have medication either, right? Did they have access to the law of attraction back then? Could their consciousness affect their reality?

People today act like depression is some crazy, merciless, world-ending thing, but did people always view it as such an insurmountable thing?

And even more relevant, are truly accomplished and wonderful LOA teachers such as Abraham-Hicks, Joe Dispenza, or Neville Goddard ever dismissive of depression, or imply that LOA wants people to ‘ignore’ it?”

“Hmmm… those are all really great questions.”

“Yeah, and how much do you want to bet whoever wrote the article you’re speaking of hasn’t asked a single one of them to themselves. How much do you want to bet they jumped immediately to blaming the law of attraction and raging against its proponents?”

“I wouldn’t want to take that bet, haha.”

“She also said that…

‘…Law of attraction teaches that any failure means we’re ‘just not trying hard enough.’”

I laughed out loud, guffawing from deep in my belly. “Why are you laughing so hard?”

“Because true teachers of the law of attraction teach that ‘trying too hard’ and ‘over-effort’ is a major obstacle to manifestation, and would never encourage people to simply ‘try harder’ if things aren’t going correctly.

They’d acknowledge that a certain level of applying oneself and adjusting one’s thoughts, moods, and beliefs is called for, but that it can be done in ways as gentle and effortless as petting a cat (animal therapy is a real thing), or helping an old lady across the street in order to feel more valuable as a human being.”

“Then why would the lady say LOA teaches ‘just try harder.’”

“Because she’s not the brightest bulb in the bunch, babe.”

“Don’t be mean!”

“I’m not.

I mean it sincerely, she has not applied very deep thought to the issue. She has not sought to truly understand the law of attraction from a wide variety of reputable sources.

She has taken things out of context in order to justify her rage.

Her arguments are in bad faith. If they had merit to them and she could cite leaders in the LOA field who actually said these things and meant them clearly, I’d be happy to give such accusations their due, but if she’s just talking out her ass, I’m sorry, I have to laugh.”

“OK, well, she also says…

‘LOA teaches that support groups full of others who are struggling brings that negativity back onto yourself.’”

“Hmm, that’s the first thing she’s said that’s even close to true.

Law Of Attraction teaches that ‘like attracts like,’ and the environments we place ourselves in have a strong potential to influence us.

For example, an addict hanging around people shooting up isn’t really doing themselves any favors, and could easily manifest a relapse unless they have incredible discipline, focus, and are able to ‘vibe higher’ than the environment they’re in.

What’s going to help someone struggling with weight-loss more, hanging around a bunch of people moaning how hard it is to lose weight, or hanging around a bunch of weight-lifters, dancers, or martial artists who’s habits and attitudes rub off?

What’s going to help someone stop relying on French more, moving to an English-speaking country, or practicing English once a month with a fellow Parisian?”

“I get your point. Honestly, I think maybe she runs a support group, or has friends who do, which may be why she’s touchy about this.”

“That’s fair, but it doesn’t change how LOA works.”

“So LOA really does say that support groups are bad?”

“Oh no, not at all. Apologies if I gave that impression. Law of attraction doesn’t ‘judge’ and ‘label’ certain actions or paths as ‘good’ or ‘bad.’ It doesn’t declare support groups as bad or anything. In fact, there are plenty of people who spend time in support groups and get value from them.”

“Then what is your point?”

“My point is the Law Of Attraction simply says to be very conscious and intentional about what environments you place yourself in, how long you stay in them, and what your vibe / mood / attitude is when you’re interacting with those environments, because a lot of the time, there are much better environments to be in than groups whose main activity is to commiserate over how hard change or healing is.”

“It reminds me of a Jay Z line from ‘Moment Of Clarity’:

‘And I can’t help the poor if I’m one of them / So I got rich and gave back, to me that’s the win-win.’”

“Perfect! Perhaps I should listen to this ‘Jay Z’ fellow you speak of.” I grinned to let Emma know I was familiar with the rapper.

“Anyway, this blogger also says that…

‘LOA encourages inaction to the point of delusion, because of live-as-if you’ve already achieved what you want.’”

“Again, she’s either misunderstanding something, or learning her law of attraction principles from very poor sources, or deliberately misinterpreting. Her bone to pick with ‘Acting-As-If’ sums up to something like this:

  • If you’re poor and want money, Acting-As-If says to spend even more, as if you’re rich.
  • If you’re fat and want to lose weight, Acting-As-If says to eat like a fiend as if your metabolism is epic.
  • If you’re unknown and want to be famous, Acting-As-If says to act like you’re the center of attention and it’ll manifest.

This is not only an inadvisably extreme application of Acting-As-If, it’s also unnecessary, and LOA does not insist on it.

Acting-As-If is one, single, solitary LOA method that can work for some people in some cases. Actors and rappers are often quite good at this, but not always.

But Law Of Attraction never suggests that there is one method that all 8 billion people on the planet must apply. Law Of Attraction says if a method doesn’t feel good to you or resonate with you, don’t do it.

There are plenty of other processes that can help manifest the reality you want such as visualization, meditation, positive-aspect lists, etc. Did she explain all this and outline how flexible LOA is and how you absolutely don’t have to ‘act-as-if’ in order to manifest?”

“She did not.”

I put on my best sarcastic face and gasped, “Wow, I’m utterly flabbergasted. From what you’ve told me of her so far, I was sure she’d present a well-rounded understanding of these things!”

“Puh-leeze, Dad.”

“Anything else?”

“She says…

‘LOA teaches to just believe and things will magically come to you.’”

“Seriously? This argument’s still around? It became popular back when The Secret came out, and we’ve had so many great LOA teachers clarify it since then.”

“Well, is it true?”

“Of course not.

Look around.

Humanity has manifested a ridiculous amount of things, turning imagination into reality, but rarely by ‘just believing.’ No, Law Of Attraction teaches that belief is the foundation that leads to inspired action, and without it, little-to-no progress, growth, or manifestation will happen.

Every artist, CEO, or creator you look up to brought their imagination or their vision to life through lots of inspired actions, often taking them on quite a journey, and Law Of Attraction is totally aligned with that…

…but none of them would’ve accomplished jack-all without the insanely important foundation of belief first, which is why LOA teachers emphasize it so much.

They also point out that occasionally ‘belief alone’ is enough to manifest things ‘out of thin air’, such as people getting an inheritance or being chosen to participate in a paid study, right when they need it most.

In those cases, literally ‘only’ belief was necessary, but it’s certainly not the majority of how LOA manifests things. LOA is very action-oriented, and tends to manifest things through actions that arise out of a healthy vibe and elevated, high-value beliefs.”

You Have Law Of Attraction Muscles

“She also says…

‘LOA teaches that all our suffering is in our control.’”

“I’m not sure if ‘all’ of it is, but such a huge percentage of it is that it makes the other ~1% or so not worth discussing.”

“So then why does this lady feel like her condition defines her? Why does she feel like there’s ‘just no easy solution’? Why is she so anti-LOA?”

“Because for her, in her current state, there is no easy solution. Her mind isn’t open to it, and anyone suggesting otherwise would rock her core beliefs, identity and philosophy so hard it would feel like a personal attack.

She can’t access LOA very effectively, even if she wanted to.

It’s like lifting a heavy weight when your muscles are atrophied. It’s doable, but it’s going to take time, effort, practice, just like it took time, neglect, and lethargy to atrophy muscles in the first place.”

“Are you saying people have ‘LOA muscles?’”

“In a way, yes.

All people have a mind that they started out in control of, and that they can reclaim control of, with practice.

All people have feelings and emotions that are their compass and guidance towards their dreams, if they (re)learn how to navigate them.

The reason some people feel that they’re at the ‘mercy’ of their suffering with no agency or control over it, is because their ‘mood muscles’ and ‘belief muscles’ are rusty.

Most people have practically forgotten what to do when negative emotion hits.

When they were toddlers, they knew how to navigate, regulate, and elevate their mood whether it was rebalancing after a tantrum, an injury, an injustice or whatever else.

Thing is, as time has gone on, most people have relied on their ‘vibe-elevating’ muscles less and less, and then in the midst of a deep depression or suffering, mood can then seem ‘unliftable.’

It’s not true of course, just like your other muscles, you can always strengthen them through applying yourself and practice, but most people would about their situation rather whine than take personal responsibility… for anything.”

“She also says…

‘LOA teaches that doctors are bad.’”

“Now you’re just, uh, ‘trolling me’, right Em?”

“No, she really said that!”

“OK, well I’m not even sure how to dignify that with an answer.

Dr. Joe Dispenza is an LOA-teaching chiropractor, and certainly believes doctors have value.

Deepak Chopra is an LOA-teaching ex-doctor, and certainly believes doctors have value.

Wayne Dyer was an LOA-teaching doctor who certainly believes doctors have value.

Those are three major, MAJOR teachers of LOA, and none of them go around hating on doctors. Where is she getting this stuff?

Law Of Attraction, again, judges no path or action.

A medical path can be a path to manifestation for some people, depending on their vibe and journey in life.

A non-medical, mind-over-body path can also be a path to manifestation, for people like Wim Hof and his students, who demonstrate often superior body-healing than what the medical community has managed.

Both paths are fine ways to manifest.

No LOA teacher I know is sitting around judging or shaming people who go to doctors.

The farthest I’ve heard any go is to say that people may want to tune into themselves, their bodies, and their emotional guidance in order to see if and when doctors are truly necessary for them.

There are countless people who have healed themselves through mind or diet, and there are countless people who have healed themselves through western medicine.

LOA says to do whatever suits you best to manifest the solutions that satisfy you.

Anyone is welcome to go the Wim Hof body-control path or the dice-me-open-and-remove-the-cancer path.

You know that your grandfather is mostly bed-ridden right?”


“Well, he could ‘law of attract’ himself out of that situation in many ‘action-paths’, but they all start with a strong, positive belief, which is what LOA emphasizes.

If he really, truly believed he was ‘on his way’ to healing and mobility, he may manifest a new bionic leg.

He may manifest an overwhelming enthusiasm to rock his rehab and physio. He may manifest an impulse to start playing wheelchair rugby.

He may manifest the ability to lucid-dream or astral project.

He may manifest money to get a top surgeon in the field to operate.

He may manifest any number of solutions that grant him mobility.

But how’s he been doing for the last couple years, Em?”

“Basically no change.”

“Exactly, because he’s put zero attention into elevating his beliefs or mood, in which case, no solutions will really be forthcoming. Just like the athletes who visualize better performance, he can visualize better mobility.

If so, he’ll manifest progress, if not, he’ll get the status quo.

That’s just how LOA works.

Thoughts become things. Even Einstein, ‘hater’ of quantum mechanics, knew this and said as much in quotes like this:

‘Match the frequency of the reality you want and you cannot help but get that reality” and believed in imagination.’”

“Wow, that makes a lot more sense than what lady-blogger claimed LOA taught, that’s for sure.”

“Yes, well, if this woman learned to cook she’d probably yell at Gordon Ramsay telling him he ‘just told her to turn on the stove and voila, she’d have a seven-course meal.’ It’s been awhile since I’ve seen someone misunderstand something so thoroughly and make so little effort to truly get it.”

“Well, thanks for taking the time to go over her objections, and even more…

Thanks for helping me explore the ‘scientific proof’ aspect of Law Of Attraction…

…that me and so many others are hungry for.”

“My pleasure, Emma.

And look, I get it. Science is crazy, it always has been.

Making a human-being’s legs move so fast that they could break the four-minute mile was so crazy, that extremely smart biologists and doctors at the time wrote it off.

Launching hunks of metal piloted by people into the sky was so crazy, even other scientists of the time dismissed it.

And now, suggesting that consciousness literally creates reality by manipulating quantum particles also sounds crazy.

Science has always been born out of ‘crazy.’

It’s an amazing tool, but it’s just that. A tool.

Science is just one tool of understanding something, and any poet, mystic, or artist can show you how it’s not the only tool to understand things, and ultimately it takes an incredibly closed, narrow-mind to assume that something is false just because science can’t back it up (yet)…

…or that authoritative voices have ‘dismissed’ something and you’ve accepted what they said by default, rather than exploring it for yourself.

Dr. Masaru Emoto’s water-intention experiments have been torn to shreds, but still, are we sure we want to write them off entirely? Or do we just want to explore them further, deeper, and with more scientific rigor than Emoto did?”

“That just gave me the shivers for some reason. I like it. It’s stupid to assume something is false just because scientific proof isn’t ‘conclusive enough’ yet.”

“Indeed. It’d be nice if people stopped demanding the world ‘prove LOA’ to them and opened their minds to possibilities, rather than dismissals. I believe ‘string theory’ is also unprovable with current technology last I checked, so do we go around dismissing string theory?”

“Uh, I don’t even know what that is.”

“Well, it doesn’t really matter.

Each person’s internal experience is subjective and can’t be accurately quantified or measured.

So even after all these books, videos, experts, studies and more that I’ve offered you, ultimately…

…no one can prove that what happens inside your personal consciousness does indeed manifest outside for you.

Because consciousness-manifesting-reality is something that people need to practice and experience for themselves.

It isn’t measurable or repeatable in a scientifically satisfactory way.

Creating a ‘control’ for this is impossible for our current tech.

Think about it, how can you prove someone is actually doing the ‘inner, psychological work’ and not just claiming they are, or lying to themselves and others?

And although quantum physics can give us some insight on how this stuff might work, and we can see shadows on the wall of how manifestation may work… science can’t actually prove any of it.

And science probably won’t get to that level of proof in your lifetime.”

“Then why did we discuss all this? What am I supposed to do?”

“Do what all of us human-beings do, explore life, experiment, find ways that work for you, no matter how they look to others.

There’s tons of interviews where celebrities share sincere, honest stories of how they became successful, and it’s stunningly common how often they all say the same things, and how often it all starts to sound like Law Of Attraction. If all your heroes are saying similar things… maybe it’s worth your honest practice and applied effort?”

“Success leaves clues. Go figure out what someone who was successful did, and model it. Improve it, but learn their steps. They have knowledge.” – Tony Robbins

“Yeah, I know you’re right, I just had a moment of panic.”

“Thank you. So since science will let you down on major life questions like ‘does god exist’ or ‘how big is the universe’ or ‘is LOA real’, I highly recommend you look into other ways to gain knowledge and understanding outside of humanity’s clearly inadequate science (so far).

My favorite way is personal experiment, personal practice, and personal introspection. What I’m saying, my sweet child, is that I understand your deep hunger for scientific evidence of the law of attraction, but the truth is… all this science doesn’t matter nearly as much as something far more important.”

“What’s that?”


Far more important than the world’s science, is you. Your life matters. And you deserve to give yourself the best chance at a great life that you can. And that means experimenting with things for yourself. Why experiment? Because as Alan Watts says:

‘People can’t be talked out of illusions.’

The whole point of life is to apply yourself, experiment, practice, and discover what’s true for you.

Hearing scientists speak, or getting input from me, is just data for you to play with. They’re ideas for you to try on for size. It’s fuel for your own experiments.

And I believe you’re going to do them. I believe in you.

I believe you’ll get the hang of the law of attraction, and manifest the life you want. Whether you do it in ‘woo-woo’ ways, scientific ways, or you just simply stick to a committed, refined ‘visualization’ practice like many athletes do, I don’t really care.

What I do care about is my daughter living her ‘best life’ and realizing as much of her dreams as possible, and I really hope you care about as much as I do, or more, because as Henry Ford said:

‘Whether you think you can, or you think you can’t – you’re right.’” — Henry Ford

“Awwwww, Dad!” Emma hugged me in front of Niagara Falls, and for that moment, I felt like the best Dad in the whole wide world.

The End.

Note: Law Of Attraction is simple at its core but –like many skills– has a nuanced execution and takes a decent amount of time & effort to ‘get right’ for those not naturally gifted. Plus science isn’t really able to explain much about consciousness currently… so there’s more to it than I mentioned here. I wrote this simply because many people get confused on manifesting reality using LOA, and I felt this would help.

P.S. Want more from me on Law Of Attraction?