Remember the model imperative, no function is unfolded or awakened in us until we are in contact with an appropriate model of one who has developed that function.  So the infant's heart picks up a tremendous signal from the mother's heart and that signal is everything is great, we are back with our matrix in this new wonderful kind of a world but right back home where we belong.  And we do know that immediately shuts off the production of adrenal steroids, there will be no shock in that infant and instead that infant is smiling and opening up to this new world to embrace what it contains immediately.

Now if we look at the connection with the heart, we get into some very interesting research.  I've talked about the intelligence of the heart, and of course everyone assumes that this is a metaphor, and it is a metaphor but it is also a fact.  Years ago they discovered there is something unique about a heart cell.  A heart cell contracts and expands.  It is different from a neuron which operates on a kind of a vibratory basis.  You could take a heart cell out of the heart and put it in the right kind of a fluid and keep it alive for a while.  You can't do that with a neuron, if you disconnect a neuron from its connection with others neurons, generally it dies immediately.  It has to be in it’s resonate field in order to operate.  The interesting thing about the heart cell, disconnected from the heart, was that quickly it lost its rhythmic pulsation and began to fibrillate.  It would just flop all around out of rhythm and soon destroy itself and die.

Put two heart cells together on the slide and they would both fibrillate in that fashion.  The poor little creature can't stand to be cut off from its matrix, from its source.  And neither can we.  If we are cut off from our heart, we fibrillate, it just takes us a little longer to die.  Now the interesting thing about these two heart cells is, if you bring them close enough together, at a certain point of proximity spatial proximity, they do not have to touch.  There can be a physical barrier between them, but at a certain point of spatial proximity, the two heart cells somehow or other communicates with one another and immediately go back into the synchronous rhythm of each other which they experienced within the heart itself.  Now we've never been able to explain that.  I know why but this has to be hypothetical.  And that is that the intelligence which functions thorough the heart, which is non-verbal, non-personal, transpersonal, universal simply moving for well-being and not individual or anything like that, this intelligence is non-localized and the two cells simply have to come into a certain proximity and then they are sharing the same non- localized field and they go back into their synchrony with each other.

Now if you take up the hundreds of billions of cells that go together to make up a heart all functioning at absolute synchrony with each other you can see that if one communicates one cell can communicate with another across a special or physical barrier then obviously two hearts have some form of communication as well.  Now that has to be hypothetical but there is a lot of evidence to back it up.

Now let's look at some of the other evidence about the heart, this was years ago, then came along John and Beatrice Lacey, operating under a government grant, NIMH Grant, did years of research into the heart, and drew the conclusions that there was a direct and intimate dialogue within the heart and the brain.  Between the heart and the limbic system of the brain.  The limbic system being what?  The emotional-cognitive structures of the brain that handle all relationship.  Remember that, we talked about that earlier.  This mammalian brain handles all emotions, handles all relationships and that has the Lacey's claim direct unmediated connections with the heart pumping away down in our chest.  And that the brain was always informing the heart of its current experience in the world and the heart was always exhorting the brain to make an appropriate response to the world.

Now that was their claim years ago.  Since then, they spoke of this as a dialogue between the mind and the heart, lots of other research has on the heart has taken place.  The discovery that between the cells of the heart there are transmitters operating exactly as you have in the neuro-transmitters of the brain, which means a great deal of communication is taking place on an individual level, and on a collective level in this heart process.  

So, with that as a preface, let's look at Whittlestone's claim that the heart has a profound effect on the embryo on the infant throughout the whole nine months and then at birth comes the greatest role of the heart. Researchers reading that the heart has an effect on the infant's brain and body went in back in the sixties and took recordings of the heart beat and played them over loud speakers in the nurseries of our hospitals where all of our newborns were isolated of course from their mothers.  And it reduced crying from forty to fifty percent right across the board.  Now a true scientific inquiry would have said "why?"  And plumed it to the depths to find why that profound effect on behavior would take place from an artificial canned mother's heartbeat.  Instead those researchers was rushed quickly to patent and market a rock a bye teddy bear which had within it a recorded heart beat that could be placed in the nursery at home to reduce crying by forty to fifty percent.  So the child's state of abandonment could be maintained. And yet reduce the crying the reason being at birth we do know that the biggest signal that natures agenda calls for at birth is immediate contact with the mothers heart.  
As the infant has been in contact with it throughout the nine months, and its single biggest imprinting.  And the mother immediately in all preliterate societies there is a little thirty thousand year old figure that shows the newborn mother, she is still squatting and she just brought the infant up to her breast she has got a real big smile on her face and she puts it to the left breast.  Our research people said that was because we are all right handed, but we find that left handed mothers put their infants to the left breast as well.

All fathers when they pick up a new infant will automatically keep it to the left hand, left breast including left-handed fathers, now the reason being and this has to be hypothetical, I have nothing other than my own intuitive knowledge of this to back me up, but if you bring the infant's heart into proximity, spatial, physical proximity of the mother's heart something happens between these two levels of intelligence.  There is an exchange between them as there were between the two heart cells themselves.

Remember the model imperative, no function is unfolded or awakened in us until we are in contact with an appropriate model of one who has developed that function.  So the infant's heart picks up a tremendous signal from the mother's heart and that signal is everything is great, we are back with our matrix in this new wonderful kind of a world but right back home where we belong.  And we do know that immediately shuts off the production of adrenal steroids, there will be no shock in that infant and instead that infant is smiling and opening up to this new world to embrace what it contains immediately.