With idea of biofields in mind it is worth taking a sunday look at WHEE, keeping in mind that this book never uses the idea of biofields: it speaks of ‘transitions’ and their geographical regions. But it is worth looking at one of these transitions in the staggering detail: Archaic Greece: the clue
We are given via religion the tale of a transition in Axial ‘Israel’ distorted now by its mythological wrapper. This has confused the picture. Now we see what was intuited in stark clarity in the synchronous cousing, Archaic Greece in our dating actually about 900BCE to 600BCE, followed by a fantastic direct outcome in classical Greece 600BCE to ca. 400BCE. The latter can confuse us: it is better after seeing the synchronous cases to think in terms of the early interval in which Greece gestated and laid foundations and then began to take off.
Consider our method: these intervals of rapid innovation are discontinuous: we don’t see such periods continuously. This provokes the idea of a ‘non-random’ pattern: history shows non-random periods of such rapid transition. In the case of archaic Greece we are confronted with the need to explain rapid innovations in tandem cultural nexus groups, e.g. art, poetry, epic, politics: republics and a first democracy, proto-science, architecture, the list goes on. Note that no mono-causal theory we know of can explain sudden transformations in such different cultural complexes.
We are driven to consider that this is (almost by definition) a ‘field’ phenomenon. That just means that a ‘field of disconnected entities undergoing simultaneous transformations’ is connected somehow, and out pops the work ‘field’.