2.1 Coincidence

Coincidence refers to “the occurrence of events simultaneously or consecutively in a striking manner without an obvious causal explanation between them” (Main, 2007, p. 12). The coincidence concept assumes that we either do not or cannot have knowledge of all the relevant variables to predict a coincidence event (Beitman, 2011). That is, a cause is any event that impacts the occurrence of some other event. So, if a cause were known, then “coincidence” does not apply, as this would suggest a known lawful process and not an unknown cause. Coincidence spans many academic disciplines (Beitman, 2016), providing the context for several studies of coincidence that do not center on Jung’s ideas. For example, some have argued that the apparent meaningfulness of coincidences can be explained by statistics and cognitive psychology, and that some low-probability coincidences may just be pure randomness (Brugger, Landis, & Regard, 1990).

Beitman (2011) proposed four broad types of “coincidence”: synchronicity, serendipity, seriality, and simulpathity. In such a classification, synchronicity refers to a specific type of coincidence which, consistent with Jung’s original definition, involves meaningful connections that often (but not always) occur within close timing of each other. Beitman (2011) emphasizes that researchers need to develop a taxonomy that operationalizes distinct categories of coincidence in part based on the belief that there may be different coincidences with different explanations. Specifically, if coincidences have different explanations, it is critical to be able to divide them appropriately into distinct groups to study and to better understand the mechanisms (see Figure 2). Synchronicity, then, is viewed as one subtype of the main coincidence category, generally without overlap with the other types. One general goal of this paper will be to argue against this categorization.

View Full Size

Figure 2

The coincidence concept

Citation: International Journal of Jungian Studies 13, 1 (2021) ; 10.1163/19409060-20201002

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

2.2 Chance

The concept of chance has received little formal analysis (Sacco, 2020). Chance is defined as the level of agreement that would be observed if there is a known base rate for the phenomenon under study. This definition of chance assumes an a priori-specified distribution for comparison. Making this assumption justifies the statistical procedure of chi-square to analyze the differences among the data in contingency tables to determine whether the patterns of difference are different enough to be considered statistically meaningful. Chi-square results have been used to indicate the strength of the relationships among random events and synchronistic events as study variables (Sacco, 2019b).

Chi-square is a statistical procedure used for testing relationships between categorical data. It works by examining “frequency counts” or the number (frequency) of observations that fit into different categories. Sacco (2019b) made use of this level of data to see if synchronicity experiences reveal meaningful patterns of relationships. Since the categories of random and synchronicity can be considered frequency counts that correspond to the number of days in proximity to Fibonacci time patterns, synchronicity can be studied empirically (Sacco, 2019b, 2020). Thus, the concept of chance represents an indispensable element in the empirical study of synchronicity insofar as it allows statistical significance testing.

2.3 Synchronicity

Carl Jung (1952) first coined the term synchronicity from the Greek syn (with or together) and chronos (time) to describe an acausal order of reality as an explanation for meaningful coincidence. It is important to note that Jung associated acausal order with “the properties of natural numbers or the discontinuities of physics” (Jung 1952, para. 965). Indeed, synchronistic phenomena in the narrow sense are acts of creation in time, whereas the acausal order of the natural numbers or quantum physics has a timeless nature.

The status of something as more than a coincidence—as synchronicity—depends on the presence of meaningfulness. Jung’s conception of what makes some coincidences meaningful and others not was rooted in his psychological theory of archetypes and individuation. However, not everyone who acknowledges meaningful coincidences as a distinct class of events would share Jung’s views on what forms their meaningfulness. To dissociate themselves from Jung’s philosophical undertones, some have eschewed the word “synchronicity” altogether. Unless they happen to be referring to Jung’s theory, many people prefer to use instead the more neutral term “meaningful coincidence” or even just “coincidence” (Main, 2007). Still, popular and widespread current use of the word “synchronicity” is consistent with Jung’s conception of meaningfulness.

The theory of synchronicity served as an umbrella for Jung, under which he grouped many paranormal events, including telepathy, precognition, and clairvoyance. Other paranormal phenomena that Jung included under synchronicity were poltergeists, divination (e.g., the I Ching), and astrology (Jung, 1952; Main, 1997). Research shows that synchronicity and paranormal phenomena share many common features (Storm, 1999; Tart, 1981). Furthermore, the constructs of paranormal, superstitious, magical, and supernatural are the same (Lindeman & Svedholm, 2012). Lindeman and Svedholm (2012) showed that any differences between the terms and their meanings is a matter of connotation instead of any substantial difference in beliefs. This validates Jung’s conception of synchronicity as an integrative concept (Main, 2018).

Synchronicity is different from ordinary experience in that it disrupts “every day” causal principles. Explanations for the disruption of causality are various, even bizarre (e.g., poltergeists, UFO s, witchcraft). But these purportedly unrelated experiences can be encompassed by a superordinate theory of synchronicity that recognizes experiences of causality different from everyday causal principles. The key point is the following: once non-causal correlations are recast in terms of fundamentally emergent dynamics, this invites the new view of synchronicity in terms of emergent dynamics as well (Main, 2018). Emergent properties cannot be fully predicted a priori but only approximated to guide the experimental process.

View Full Size

Figure 3

The synchronicity concept

Citation: International Journal of Jungian Studies 13, 1 (2021) ; 10.1163/19409060-20201002

• Download Figure
• Download figure as PowerPoint slide

Figure 3 is the proposed diagram of the synchronicity concept. In the present study, the term “synchronicity” is used in the committed sense of Jung’s conception of archetypes and individuation. The proposition is that Jung’s view is correct (and thus the benchmark for understanding synchronicity as a unifying construct). An important part of this review will be to discuss time-series modeling that defines chance versus synchronistic events relatively precisely (Sacco, 2020). Time-series modeling can guide the future development of the science of synchronicity based on mathematical explanation. This challenges the coincidence concept that relevant variables for prediction remain unknown. It is suggested that the concept of coincidence does not have value in predictive tests because that which is termed “coincidence” assumes we cannot have knowledge of the relevant variables for prediction (Beitman, 2011).

3.1 Context

Contextual factors influencing synchronicity experience are divisible into three categories: (a) emotionality, (b) temporality, and (c) similarity. According to classical Jungian theory, synchronicity has a compensatory function that facilitates the individuation process towards wholeness (Jung, 1921). The compensatory dynamics have a context of emotionality that can range from weak to strong. Emotional intensity is often linked to major change events such as births and deaths, marriage and divorce, illness, moving, job changes, and personal problems that seem unsolvable (Beitman, 2016). Distinct differences exist between non-crisis and crisis experiences. For example, a crisis can often stimulate creative thinking or encourage new goals. Hence, synchronicities may emerge “spontaneously” as resolution and solutions to problems. Also, a crisis often involves emotions of negative valence. Jung was especially interested in the crisis of values and goals in the later stages of the life cycle (Jung, 1933). In Jung’s sense, synchronicity occurring within a context of crisis may serve as a powerful compensation in personality.

The second contextual factor focuses on temporality. Temporality is the experience of time in a given synchronistic event (namely, interval and recurrence). The interval characterizing synchronicity can vary from simultaneous to many years. From Jung’s perspective, the principle of synchronicity “asserts that the terms of a meaningful coincidence are connected by simultaneity and meaning” (Jung 1952, para. 916). Simultaneity alludes to events happening or existing at the same time. However, the clause of simultaneity has been criticized. For example, Aziz (1990) and Main (2007) suggested that Jung’s emphasis on simultaneity is misleading since, in several instances, Jung himself provided examples of synchronicity where simultaneity is not a necessary feature. Main (2007) has noted that simultaneity might lead to increased clarity and understanding of meaningful correspondence. Beitman (2011, p. 11) also noted that short time intervals might increase the force of synchronicity “because short time intervals between two seemingly related events begin to suggest a cause—lightning is quickly followed by thunder so lightning causes thunder.”

Some researchers define simultaneity by a particular timeframe. Perry et al. (2009) defined CMPE s (Conjunctions of Meaningfully Parallel Events) as a distinct phenomenon within the spectrum of synchronicity that has a short time interval. A CMPE comprises two similar events, occurring within 12 hours of each other. However, even events taking place months or years apart may be very surprising and have a significant impact. Consider precognition, for instance. The connection of a dream with an event month’s apart is a special synchronicity not dealt with by the notion of simultaneity. From this perspective, we can distinguish between simultaneous and non-simultaneous synchronicity based on whether the conjunction of events occurs within a specific interval of 12 hours (as was suggested by Perry et al., 2009).

Synchronicity is also associated with recurrence. For example, Main (2007) described a man studying the biblical Zechariah’s vision of the four horsemen with their four horses of red, black, dapple, and white. He then went out on the balcony of his hotel and saw four horses (red, black, dapple, and white) grazing below. Afterward, 11 months later, while exploring a natural area, he turned to see grazing nearby another four horses of the same colors. This example views synchronicity in a broader context of recurrence. Here, a synchronistic theme is found in its complete form in more than one movement and can also generate surprise and raise significant questions. It also shows how synchronicity can be recognized by looking back in time and raises the question about whether synchronicity exists if no one notices it. Robert Aziz affirms the objective nature of synchronicity, “a synchronistic event remains a synchronistic event whether or not its meaningfulness is recognized” (1990, p. 76).

The third contextual factor emphasizes similarity (Beitman, 2011). The themes of synchronicity may have the same or similar meaning. For example, a person may text someone who is texting them about the same thing at almost the same time. Or maybe they were texting something related but not exactly the same. Alternatively, a person may think of a song, and it plays on the radio, an exact match. Or maybe they were thinking of a song, and another song from the same artist is playing instead: a similar but not an exact match. More often, the themes are similar, not exactly the same. Similarity can be generalized with fractal geometry (Sacco, 2016, 2018). Fractal geometry is the study of shapes made up of smaller repeating patterns. Linear fractals or “classical” fractals are exactly self-similar. Looking at a small part of a linear fractal’s shape, it looks exactly like the original fractal, only smaller. This size difference is called “the scalability factor” or “scale.” Non-linear fractals are fractals that exhibit a self-similar structure but are not exactly self-similar. The appearance of a non-linear fractal resembles some of its smaller parts but always with some variation. Natural fractals fall into this category.

3.2 Process

A process is a set of sequential changes in a system. The synchronicity process can be parameterized by the categories mind and object. These two major categories can combine in different ways to produce unique synchronicity experiences. Four permutations of mind and object categories are mind-mind, mind-object, object-mind, and object-object. The synchronicity process, thus, classifies into these four groups. First, the events making up synchronicity can involve the intersection of two mental events (mind-mind relations). Telepathy is when two people simultaneously have similar dreams or thoughts. Beitman (2011) exemplified another mind-mind correspondence he refers to as “simulpathity.” Simulpathity describes shared feeling at a distance, such as experiencing the pain of a loved one in a distant location.

Second, synchronicity can involve the intersection of a mental event with an objective event (mind-object relations). Mind-object synchronicities include but are not limited to: (a) Synchronism: a mental pattern matches an objective event offering significant psychological change as illustrated in the introduction to the paper by Bono’s synchronicity, (b) Serendipity: finding needed people, things, or ideas as illustrated by the amazing series of events involving the discovery and manufacture of penicillin, and (c) Precognition: dreaming something to happen and then finding it happens. Although some overlap exists among these three categories, they are sufficiently different to be treatable as unique experiences. For example, serendipity differs from synchronism in that the person is engaged with a specific task for which they seek a solution. Furthermore, precognition is different from synchronism in that it is involuntary.

Synchronism is a term Jung first used in 1928 to name synchronicity in the sense of meaningful coincidence (Main, 1997). In his original formulation, the term “synchronism” was related to both the ideas of simultaneity and meaning. However, Jung later redefined the term synchronism as the occurrence of two events which have no special or noteworthy meaning between them (Jung, 1952, para. 849). It encapsulated events often referred to as coincidence, where meaning may or may not be found in the convergence of disparate events. But here, the term “synchronism” is used in its original sense of simultaneity and meaning. As a useful identifier, it addresses the need for a term specific to mind-object relations that encompass directed (voluntary) attention.

Third, synchronicity can involve the intersection of an objective event with a mental event (object-mind relations). Object-mind synchronicities will be referred to here as signs. Take the example of Zechariah’s four horses described in the previous section. Recall the second appearance of the four horses occurred 11 months later, while not simultaneously thinking about them. It would seem this experience would have a different qualitative character than in the first case when the sighting was preceded by thinking about the horses (a case of synchronism). This example distinguishes between the ordering of mind-object and object-mind relations.

Finally, synchronicity can involve the intersection of two or more events in the objective world (object-object relations). Object-object synchronicities are referred to as seriality. The difference between the preceding three groups is that a 3rd person can observe the matches. Although a mind takes note of serial events, there is not necessarily a subjective element. The series could be verified like any objective data. The Austrian biologist Paul Kammerer thoroughly described seriality type events. Kammerer was not particularly interested in meaning—only in repeated sequences. For example, Kammerer recorded that one day, his brother-in-law went to a concert and had both seat No. 9 and cloakroom ticket No. 9. The next day he went to another concert where he had seat No. 21 and cloakroom ticket No. 21 (Browne, 2017).

3.3 Content

Jung proposed that the meaningfulness in synchronicity comes from the Archetypes. For Jung, the content of any genuine synchronicity must be archetypal. Archetypes are manifestations of unconscious instincts that date back to prehistoric times. Jung (1969) argued that archetypes are the templates of inherited experiences that exist in the collective unconscious. The first mention of archetypes can be traced back to Plato. For the ancient Greeks, archetypes represented universal forms that gave order and meaning to chaos. Archetypes also appear in narrative structures as characters in literature, arts, religion, and films. Jung (1969) argues that this resonance of archetypes in the minds of viewers is created by archetypes connecting at an unconscious level. Hence, archetypes are often unavailable for identification in conscious thought. Archetypes are activated through symbolic images. Jung considered that synchronistic events tend to occur in situations in which an archetype is active or “constellated.” Such constellation of archetypes in the life of a person is governed by the process of individuation—the inherent drive of the psyche toward increased wholeness. Archetypes are interdependent. They are like chords in music, each standing alone yet together, creating the symphony of our lives.

Kalnova and Hamilton (2014) describe eight of the most prominent archetypes: Shadow, creator, hero, passive state, spirit, self, child, and animus-anima (see Table 1). The existence of a unifying archetypal structure is open to debate. Most archetypes have remained relatively stable over generations, although several archetypes seem to have undergone conceptual evolution (Kalnova & Hamilton, 2014). The notion of biological archetypes provides a model that connects the internal mental realm to physical action (Becker & Neuberg, 2019; MacLennan, 2006). All our experiences involve physical as well as mental action. Even the passive experience of watching a sunset (a sensory, cognitive, and affective event) activates neurons in the motor system. Our cognitive, emotional, and sensorimotor responses are organized and shaped into action tendencies by evolutionarily prepared, psychobiological action systems that are (1) epigenetically hard-wired, (2) susceptible to classical conditioning, (3) self-organizing, (4) self-stabilizing, and (5) adaptive (Panksepp, 1998). Given the diversity of life challenges we encounter from infancy to old age, a wide range of potential, available action systems are needed for optimal adaptation to the environment.

Eight action systems have been described: Defense, attachment, exploration, energy regulation, caregiving, sociability, play, and sexuality (Ogden, Minton, & Pain, 2006). These action systems stimulate us to respond to a threat, form close attachment relationships, explore, regulate energy (through eating, sleeping, etc.), care for others, participate in social relationships, play, and reproduce. These eight action systems have a striking resemblance to the eight Jungian archetypes. The biological archetypes associated with Jungian archetypes are summarized in Table 1. As can be seen, each Jungian archetype possesses mental characteristics that correspond to the biological action systems. Some people may relate to one or all of the archetypes in a synchronicity experience. Typically, a dominant archetype is activated with supporting archetypes. Nonetheless, these are universal themes that human beings encounter regardless of culture. They seem to encompass both an energetic and biological pattern that can help us to understand ourselves on a deeper and more holistic level.

In a chronological sense, the archetypes are complex and evolving (Jung, 1969). A lifespan focus can help better understand the integration of archetypal materials into consciousness (Becker & Neuberg, 2019). The lifespan model focuses on turning points and potential stages in time when people are apt to change abruptly. One of the early proponents of a lifespan view of development, Carl Jung (1933) recognized that unconscious compensation usually involves a disruptive factor. For Jung, unconscious compensation is the main form of interaction between the unconscious and consciousness. This is the psyche’s way of correcting the ego’s blindness or inappropriate views and guiding individuation. Likewise, Erikson’s (1982) influential eight-stage theory of psychosocial development also has conflict at its core. Conflicts between two countervailing tendencies (such as autonomy versus shame in young children) lead to the next stage of development and are shaped by relations between parents and children (environment and genes).

Central to the Fibonacci Life Chart Method (FLCM) is a consideration of the eight life stages of human development. These life stages are (1) early infancy (0–1 year); (2) toddler (2–3 years); (3) early childhood (4–6 years); (4) middle childhood (7–11 years); (5) adolescence (12–17 years); (6) young adulthood (18–29 years); (7) middle adulthood (30–48 years); and (8) older adulthood (49–78+ years) (see Sacco, 2013). The FLCM model incorporates epigenetic “unfolding” and emergent properties from one life stage to another (via the mathematics of the Fibonacci sequence). This deepening of consciousness, through progressive integration of archetypal energies, is shown in Table 1. Indeed, the eight archetypes appear to be none other than the universal states of conflict that emerge from one developmental period to the next and hence from one life stage intersect to another (Becker & Neuberg, 2019).

3.4 Explanation

Synchronicity triggers the question, “What does this mean?” This question indicates a search for how the synchronicity happened, its cause, or explanation. These explanations can be grouped into five different categories: astrological, mathematical, quantum, psychological, and religious.

Astrological. The first explanation is astrological. Astrology is the study of correspondences between the motion of celestial bodies and human events. In his attempt to come to a satisfactory understanding of synchronicity, Jung wrote, “My evenings are taken up very largely with astrology. I make horoscope calculations in order to find a clue to the core of psychological truth” (Jung, 1975, p. 24). Jung also stated that “… astrology is of particular interest to the psychologist, since it contains a sort of psychological experience which we call projected—this means that we find the psychological facts as it were in the constellations” (Jung, 1975, p. 475). Jung seems to have thought astrology might be able to demonstrate a synchronistic relationship between the movements of planets and individual-level determinants. As far as the astrological explanation is concerned, it is important to note that planetary motion has an essential temporal symmetry with the Fibonacci sequence (Sacco, 2019a). Thus, in consideration of astrological correlation as a factor in synchronistic events, the mathematics of the Fibonacci sequence could help explain synchronicity (Sacco, 2016, 2018, 2019b, 2020).

Mathematical. A second explanation is mathematical. Jung and his followers share the belief that numbers are the archetypes of order, and the major participants in synchronicity creation (Jung, 1960; Von Franz, 1992). If number and mathematics reflect the order of a unified reality, this would explain the profound mystery of how mathematics, which is a phenomenon of the mind, should prove so useful in representing the physical world. This mysterious harmony between psyche and matter is present at the foundation of all physics. However, Jungian psychology views mathematics as much more than a mere language of quantity. For Jung, numbers are symbols charged with archetypal meaning. Von Franz (1992) also pointed out numbers are not static forms but represent vibrational energies (as the Pythagoreans recognized in the intimate connection between numbers and musical tones).

Like the quantum atom, numbers have two complementary aspects, both of which are required if we are to understand them. They have both quantitative and qualitative aspects, both static and dynamic aspects. It is through this double aspect of number, Von Franz claims, that we can see their importance as a bridge between psyche and matter: “This complementary double aspect of number (quantity and quality) is, in my opinion, the thing which makes it possible for the world of quantity (matter) and of quality (psyche) to interlock with each other in a periodical manner” (Von Franz, 1992, p. 57). Thus, the key to the unity of psyche and matter, and understanding the unified field, involves the nature of number.

Jung proposed the link between mind and matter in synchronicity is bridged by the Fibonacci numbers: “… synchronicity … is a secondary effect of the primary coincidence of mental and physical events (as in the Fibonacci series). The bridge seems to be formed by the numbers” (Jung, 1976, p. 288). The understanding suggested by Jung is that mind and matter are aspects of the same reality, with Fibonacci numbers as a key archetypal core of both. Jung also suggested the individuation process had the geometry of a spiral (Jung, 1968). Possibly because a spiral pattern can be formed from squares with sides whose lengths are Fibonacci numbers. Although Jung made the provocative connection of the Fibonacci numbers with the synchronicity principle, only recently has the role of Fibonacci numbers been examined more extensively (see Sacco, 2016, 2018, 2019b, 2020).

The notion that Fibonacci numbers are involved in synchronistic events invokes insights based on modern dynamical systems theory (Cambray, 2009; Hogenson, 2005; Sacco, 2020). Dynamical systems theory has provided a solid background from which to speculate about synchronicity because it gives predictions about the evolution of systems (Nowak, Vallacher, Praszkier, Rychwalska, & Zochowski, 2020; Pikovsky, Rosenblum, & Kurths, 2001; Strogatz, 2004). The notion that Fibonacci numbers govern the evolution of systems has been applied to synchronicity theory to furnish a series of predictions that have been empirically tested. The first investigation of this type was conducted by Sacco (2019b), and it has been found that Fibonacci time patterns are tied to synchronistic events at a rate higher than expected by chance. Additional empirical evidence links the golden ratio to harmonic brain frequencies (Pletzer, Kerschbaum, & Klimesch, 2010). More broadly, Fibonacci time patterns are linked to a broad range of celestial mechanical cycles and the spiral structure of galaxies (Sacco, 2019a). This implies the Fibonacci numbers and golden ratio temporally link processes on multiple levels of organization.

Quantum. A third explanation is quantum physics. Jung associated acausal orderedness with the phenomena of quantum physics, which defy any classical determination of a precise location in space and time (Jung, 1952). Because the phenomenon of synchronicity involves the acausal coordination of the inner and outer worlds in a meaningful way, it is not exclusively a psychological or physical phenomenon. Instead, it is “psychoid” meaning it involves both mind and matter as complementary aspects (Atmanspacher, 2012, 2014, 2018; Atmanspacher & Fach, 2013). Thus, Jung interpreted synchronicity to imply the existence of a profound level of reality before any distinction between mind and matter. In other words, synchronicity phenomena represent a manifestation in consciousness of psychoid structures present in the depths of a transcendental unitary reality Jung called the unus mundus (one world).

Quantum experiments show, at least in the microworld of subatomic particles, an instantaneous connection between atoms no matter how far away they are from one another. Known as quantum non-locality, physicists are teaching us there is a unified field that precedes physical reality (Stapp, 2015). But exactly how humans might interact with this unified field remains unclear. One possible starting point is the idea of the implicate order, proposed by the physicist David Bohm. Bohm’s (1980) theory suggests there are three major realms of existence: the explicate order, the implicate order, and a source or ground beyond both. Implicate order refers to enfolded order, whereas explicate order means unfolded order. The flowing movement of the whole can thus be understood as a process of continuous enfolding and unfolding of order or structure. From moment to moment, there exists a rhythmic pulse between implicate and explicate realities. Thus, synchronicity takes place as the bridge between implicate and explicate orders, whose complementary nature defines the undivided totality (Peat, 1987).

Psychological. A fourth explanation is cognitive/psychological. Some scholars suggest that synchronicity is a rational cognitive strategy that humans use to help make sense of events that appear to lack causality (Johansen & Osman, 2015), while others suggest that synchronicity provides a way for humans to create meaning in their lives (Colman, 2011). Other cognitive/psychological perspectives view synchronicity as something that can be explained by the law of large numbers, which states that in large populations, any strange event is likely to happen (Brugger, Landis, & Regard, 1990; Hand, 2015). This is another way of saying that synchronicities are random chance events. This hypothesis is open to empirical tests and is being investigated. To reach an adequate understanding of synchronicity such a methodology has to be developed in terms of an analysis of the base rate probability of random events (Sacco, 2020). Far from being simply a subjective experience, the synchronistic event is a complex phenomenon that proceeds in terms of a dynamically evolving event within what is called the state space that obeys mathematical rules. Recent approaches to base rate estimation for synchronicity use the distribution of calendar dates corresponding to a Fibonacci algorithm generator (see Sacco, 2020). Obtaining estimates for base rates is important as preliminary results show a higher correlation of synchronicity with Fibonacci time patterns (Sacco, 2019b).

Religious. Finally, many people believe the Universe or God causes synchronicity. Among the general public, divine intervention is the most accepted explanation for meaningful coincidences (Rushnell, 2006). Thus, religious faith provides many people with an explanation for synchronicity. Main has provided a scholarly investigation of synchronicity that shows the importance of reconciling the synchronicity concept and the field of religious studies (Main, 2007). Similarly, Mansfield (1995) draws on the views of Middle Way Buddhism to suggest the relationship of emptiness/interconnectedness to quantum nonlocality and the synchronicity principle.

3.5 Summary

In summary, this literature review reveals that the synchronicity concept can be analyzed based on four dimensions: context, process, content, and explanation. Recent empirical study supports the notion that Fibonacci time patterns may have an important impact on the frequency of synchronicity experience (Sacco, 2019b). Furthermore, celestial mechanics are not usually taken into account in explanations of synchronicity, despite celestial mechanical cycles having temporal symmetry with Fibonacci time patterns (Sacco, 2019a). This literature review suggests that Fibonacci time patterns may form a superordinate theory of synchronicity across all subtypes, including mind-mind, mind-object, object-mind, and object-object synchronicities. Not only are there overlaps between various synchronicity subtypes, but mathematical and quantum principles (i.e., implicate and explicate orders) govern every aspect of the macro world. This framework of a superordinate theory could be used to develop an empirically based intervention for supporting synchronicity awareness and mental health in clinical practice.

4.1 Example 1

Four key features characterize the synchronicity taxonomy, context, process, content, and explanation. All are measurable in the specific synchronicity described by Bono (Kootnikoff, 2010) (see Table 3). In this case, Bono described how he woke up for a concert’s soundcheck, following a late-night listening to the soundtrack of a Roy Orbison song entitled “In Dreams,” and had a tune of a new song in his head. During the soundcheck, he performed it for the other members of U2, who agreed that the track sounded like an Orbison song. A short while later, Orbison met the band backstage at Wembley Stadium and asked Bono if he would like to write a song with/for him. This synchronicity led to their collaboration on the song “She’s a Mystery to Me.”

Context is the backdrop of synchronicity. The inner context refers to the emotional intensity, which is the magnitude of positive (or negative) affect. In this case, musical involvement amplifies the positive emotional intensity of the experience. The outer context is made up of the time interval, recurrence, and similarity. The time interval (that is, time aligned between events) occurs within a few hours. Because this is the first pattern of relationship of the synchronicity, it is nonrecurrent. A high degree of mutual intentionality suggests a high degree of similarity. The basic similarity is that of Bono wanting to create music sounding like Roy, and Roy wanted to meet Bono for a potential collaboration (although they had not met before).

Processes of this synchronicity are synchronism and serendipity. First, it is classified as synchronism, given the parallel of voluntary directed attention with outer events. Second, the synchronism also becomes serendipity, given the conscious aim during the process. That is, Bono is seeking to create music sounding like Roy Orbison. This intention is drawn from the inspiration of listening to Roy’s music. And also, unconscious patterns of musical structure that emerge from memories and emotions. The musical improvisation processes the next day more vividly expresses the intention of creating music “sounding like” Roy Orbison. Serendipity then structures the building and sustaining of the relationship. If Bono dreamed of meeting Roy Orbison, it would have qualified as pre-cognition.

Content is found to mirror the archetypes of child and anima. For Jung, contact with the child archetype represents the primordial experience of childlike freshness and spontaneity (Jung, 1969). The musical background is equivalent to the child archetype. Music is based on the equality of participants, with no hierarchy. This is a remnant of childhood innocence. A focusing of simple joy—evidence of absolute freedom of thought and action—with no pressure or tension from within or without. The communicative archetype is that of play. The song meaning “She’s a Mystery to Me” is about the artist’s muse and the elusiveness of creative inspiration. The song lyrics allude to an artist who is left frustrated and without words to express his artistic vision. It expresses the mystery at the heart of creation through a deep sense of the archetypal feminine. By accomplishing right-relationship and deep understanding with both these archetypes (Inner Child and Anima) a man can evolve his psyche to maturity, balance, and harmony.

In explanation, it may be pointed out that this synchronicity occurred on the evening of June 2, 1987, as U2 met Roy Orbison backstage at Wembley Stadium in London (Kootnikoff, 2010). This date is within 24 days of a Fibonacci time pattern dated May 9, 1987, as generated by the harmonic model (Sacco, 2018) and based on Bono’s birthdate of May 10, 1960. Bono was age 27.01 at the time. Moreover, the synchronicity occurred 67 days in proximity to a Fibonacci time pattern dated August 8, 1987 based on Roy Orbison’s birthdate of April 23, 1936. Roy Orbison was age 51.33 at the time. Synchronicity experiences are tied to Fibonacci time patterns at a rate higher than expected by chance (within 34 days) (see Sacco, 2019b). Based on temporal proximity (< 34 days), it could be inferred that the occurrence of this synchronicity was more meaningful for Bono than it was for Roy, which is consistent with the synchronism described by Bono. Thus, we may conclude that the synchronistic event is an emergent dynamic occurring in proximity to the Fibonacci time patterns.

4.2 Example 2

Roderick Main provided the next example of a synchronistic occurrence in his book Revelations of Chance. On August 23, 1973, while on holiday with his wife in Cambridge, Stephen Jenkins, a schoolteacher interested in unusual phenomena, saw from his hotel room four horses: red, black, dapple, and white. Immediately prior, Jenkins was immersed in a comparative study of Christian and Buddhist apocalyptic literature and had just completed an exhaustive study of Zechariah, noting specifically that the colors of the horses in Zechariah’s vision—red, black, white, and dappled—reappear with the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. This synchronicity so astonished Jenkins that he took a photo of the horses. But the synchronicity of the horses and their colors was not to end there. Eleven months later, Jenkins was with some of his school pupils on an outing to Yes Tor, a notable mountain peak located in South West England. They were taking photos of a particular rock formation when Jenkins looked towards Yes Tor and saw a group of four horses: red, black, dapple, and white.

The first aspect of categorization discussed in the synchronicity taxonomy is the context dimension, which relates to emotional intensity, interval, and recurrence. The key to understanding the context of emotional intensity in this synchronicity is the prior preoccupation with apocalyptic literature. One might conclude that “apocalyptic” is a word too confusing and ambiguous to be of interpretive use. For some, “apocalyptic” has positive connotations as a key to understanding Jesus and as relevant to faith. For others, “apocalyptic” connotes something negative and descriptive in the present day of biblical literalism and religious fanaticism. Rather than interpret emotional intensity in terms of positive/negative specificity, it is interpreted in terms of neutrality (see Tables 4 and 5). The temporal interval of the first occurrence is less than 12 hours, and the second occurrence is 11 months (i.e., greater than 12 hours). So, the first occurrence can be said to be simultaneous (see Table 4) while the second occurrence is non-simultaneous (see Table 5). From a recurrence perspective, the first occurrence is nonrecurrent, while the second occurrence is recurrent.

According to the second aspect of the taxonomy, the process of the first synchronicity is synchronism (see Table 4). In this mind-object relation, we have the mental image of four horses with specific colors and then the simultaneous objective perception of four horses with those same colors. In the second occurrence, the synchronicity process has the structure of a sign (see Table 5). A sign is an object-mind relation that suggests the presence of a fact or idea. Thus, a sign brings a person to the point of seeing relevant facts or experiencing the truthfulness of an idea. Signs are synchronicities only when recognizable in the context of previous synchronicity. A sign recalls to memory one or more previous experiences of synchronicity. With a sign, it follows that this type of synchronicity has a recurrent emergent order.

The content dimension draws attention to the archetypes of the Self (see Tables 4 and 5). In Jungian terms, Edinger (1999) suggests the archetype of the apocalypse means the momentous event of the coming of the Self into conscious realization. Chronologically, the Self represents a regression to the period of early childhood, where the ego seeks unity between opposites of the inner and outer world. With the apocalyptic theme, the inner world created by the ego is threatened, devastated, or shown up as inadequate and limited by the outer world. A person comes away from the encounter of the Self feeling as if their inner world has been destroyed. However, the Self archetype is still chronologically more mature than the archetype of the Spirit. Whereas the Self depends on the interplay between opposites, the Spirit archetype exemplifies the primary undifferentiated oneness with the primary caregiver of early infancy.

In explanation, without the birthdate of Stephen Jenkins, it is not possible to say something more precise about the temporal location of the synchronicities in relationship to Fibonacci time patterns. These synchronicities may have occurred sometime within ±34 days of a Fibonacci time pattern. But we cannot rule out the role of chance (no matter how unlikely such occurrences might be thought to be).