Remote Viewing RV Oasis / PJRV Discussion list archives. Dojo Psi dot com / info
Remote Viewing info page spacer

The RV Oasis / PJRV Discussion List Archives

Dojo Psi Library, Archival Material, Remote Viewing and Psi

RV Oasis / PJRV List Archives Menu

RV Oasis / PJRV Discussion, Yahoo Groups.
Source Location: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/
Filetype: Archive. Topic: Remote Viewing. Blocked: by topic detail.
Archive Storage: www.firedocs.com/pjrv/ and http://www.dojopsi.info/pjrv/
Archivist: Palyne PJ Gaenir (PJRV, Palyne, Firedocs RV, TKR and the Dojo Psi.? )



begin archive





pjrv : Messages : 117?-1?01 of 4038 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/messages/117??? ) ?
??:54:06
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------

#117?

Date: Thu Nov 7, ?00? 11:45 pm Subject: A Crazy LST (sort of? ) theory dennanm This is long and dull. Unless you're really into obscure theories having zero basis in science this post won't be for you, lol. I had this idea recently. It's probably stupid, and I am bewildered even _trying_ to imagine how this could make any sense at all. But given nobody has an "answer" for why things like LST or SWS or whatever could affect a session -- I assume and always have these things are secondary (or even later? ) correlations to some primary cause -- why not. Well, I always thought of the LST -- just my own private visual, I love visual models -- as sort of like, a fuzziness or darkness or whatever that got 'between' the viewer and their access to Self (as I believe all data is self-sourced, not 'out there'? ). Since LST is star-time I conveniently thought of a solar eclipse. And then a few people told me about the recent finding -- not published yet I don't think -- about there apparently being *more* data pieces recorded during the 'deadzone' (around 18? ) of LST, it's simply that, well, they're generally WRONG. :-? ) This bounced around in my head. I finally figured out why I was so surprised to hear that. It was because I'd sort of assumed, based on the initial papers, that "contact with the target was reduced." However, this would generally produce LESS data. I mean maybe for beginner viewers or people truly desperate for data who would invent something it might be otherwise but enough of the trials were done with experienced lab viewers that I wouldn't expect that to be the case. I had three days recently where I couldn't make target contact at all, NO idea why, now I got really sick a couple days after so maybe that relates, esp. given the SWS was in the 650 range (so given the limited but suggestive data of Greg's, that should have been better, not worse? ). But, although I have sometimes invented or "pulled in" unrelated data from my future in some way in desperation, usually if I have trouble making target contact, the most obvious sign is that there isn't much data in the session. So the finding about 18LST resulting generally in more data, despite the decrease in accuracy, really got me thinking. So the psychics obviously didn't sense that they didn't have target contact. They must have kinda felt they did in fact, or they wouldn't have been writing down 'even more data than usual' (even slightly? ). So I wondered if maybe there could be some weird morphing, or overlay of targets.... some bizarre space-time blur.... but talking to someone about session disasters, I remembered a couple sessions I did where I had more than one target in the envelope by mistake. They had very funny results, such as, a round birthday cake with smoking lit candles, and a lake, became a waterwheel/steamboat with steam or vapor rising above it. ;-? ) But barring the hilarious AOL's the combination of data produced, still the main thing about those sessions was that I couldn't seem to make good contact with the target. Didn't get a lot of data. So my little visual model of some energy that "reduced" or "fuzzed" up one's connection or translation, started changing. I had this thought -- still in the totally linear visual concept model here -- what if instead of being a block to a beam, like when one planet or the moon goes in front of another, what if instead it's more like a planet or moon going BY another one, and "warping the orbital cycle" of it slightly -- sort of making it wobble so to speak, or even changing it in some way, even temporarily. That would be more confusing to a beginning scientist who could not SEE what was causing the wobble, than something real obvious like the moon going in front of the sun. Unless the science related to gravity et al and how it worked in space was worked out, the assumption would not be, "something invisible is making it wobble" but rather, "it's wobbly". What if the "deadzone" (so to speak? ) in psi is correlated in some weird way to the infamous "displacement"? Once in awhile a viewer has a session with little resemblance to the target. This could be a miss by a million miles and in my case, as I'm just finally practicing a little, I assume it is. But in the case of pretty good viewers, it makes you wonder. They FEEL they were clearly connected to the target, but feedback doesn't support that. Sometimes later feedback clears it up - they WERE right. Usually they never know. How are targets 'connected' in our reality-experience? Is it only intent? Is that why 'the decoys' are what people feel they described instead of their ARV target? Is it some free-association in the viewer's psychology? Is there some other god-knows-what cosmic "thing" that "connects or relates" things? The ancient Kabbalah belief that the universe is founded on numbers? Maybe all things which in some obscure gematriac way equal the number "14" have something in common? I have NO idea. This is the area that baffles me, I can't really consider my theory halfway sane until I have an answer to this part (how targets could be related? ), and I haven't got one. I had this picture in my head of a poster that used to be on the wall in a high school science class. I don't remember much about it. But it was something like, here's one oxygen molecule. Add A molecule and you get B result. And C and you get D result. And so on, like a "family tree" of chemistry, so to speak. And you could see how adding one more element could change something. What is it, radioactivity or something like this, is one atom or molecule off from Gold? I forget, something amazing like this. I think it's right off from Lead, too. If we could change ONE particle we could change our entire world. What if you were doing chemistry in an open test tube, and something, who knows what, went through your environment and just added extra oxygen molecules all over the place? What would be the result? It isn't that you wouldn't get chemical transactions. You'd get them plenty. Even formerly mostly-inert test tubes might suddenly start reacting. But most of the reactions would not be what you'd expect. If you didn't know about the extra molecules interfering, you would simply say that the experiment was done wrongly, or badly, or that the materials in the test tube weren't correct. You wouldn't expect they had CHANGED; you would simply expect that they were WRONG to begin with, or that inherently the reaction expectation was wrong. What if the various LST/SWS/etc. stuff is reflecting not a "suppression" of psi ability, but a "redirecting" or "changing" effect -- almost like a reflecting mirror inside oneself slightly tilted to the side? So people CAN have contact with a target, and do -- just NOT on the target intended. You know the satellites off which we bounce our various timepieces and GPS units and so forth are often wrong. The government programs them to be, so that only our military etc. knows the real values, so anybody else attempting to use them for military purposes will be hampered, lacking exactitude. At least that's what I heard. The end result is wrong... but not because the GPS unit is not working correctly, or well. It's working perfectly. It's simply that the data being fed to it is wrong. Maybe the psychics are working just as well as they always do. Maybe something about the connection is a problem; not that it isn't being made, but that its being warped in some way, maybe not even distorted but 'redirected'. Years ago I had a period where I clearly had too much Delta stream or something, after a kundalini experience, where I was aware of more than one time-stream. At first it was that in my immediate reality, even the people around me totally disagreed on what had happened that morning and I remembered one or the other. Shortly after, I remembered BOTH things having happened. As if I'd had two dreams of reality, they were different, and on waking I remembered both, but not which sequence they came in, simply that they were both equally real and equally happened. Eventually I had a major problem with time - minutes on the clock could be many hours for me (not simple perception distortion here, legit stuff got done during that time? ), hours could be minutes, entire blocks of time simply vanished from my day sometimes, once I *relived* and entire bleepin' day, and I could often remember so many variations on what that morning had contained as reality that I had a hard time phrasing questions to employees without first having to hint to figure out which was 'real' for 'them'. (Confusingly, if the employees had been working physically near me, it might not be the same for all!? ) Well, aside from almost putting me in a straightjacket (fortunately I did NOT seek help, or I'd probably still be in a padded room? ), in retrospect this has really torqued my concept of reality (to understate it? ). It wasn't just perception; other people shared the realities and even the different realities; real long-term stuff got done in the hours which became minutes, and one 10 minutes phone call could lead to another brief call in between which several hours somehow vanished. I really assumed I was completely insane at the time, and to spare ruining my life (not to mention my career? ) should just shut up and "try to act normal", but in retrospect I am more gentle with myself. I think somehow, all of that was as real as anything else, but in some way truly beyond my fathoming, I was skipping around in reality like you do a dream. I once "woke up" in reality and realized it was a dream, which had a similar effect to realizing you are simultaneously someone else too -- I felt like my brain almost cracked. There are some beliefs that are too powerful to break that fast and I think the brain at least as we've developed it in the current world culture, *requires* certain constructs for stability. I think it's dangerous and I think a lot of people with similar experience would be lunatics as a result of such experiences. (I believe my childhood, which required constant 'survival' skills but as one primary theme varied/changed constantly and drastically, actually allowed me to deal with the seeming disconnects in reality better than many would.? ) So, I wonder, what caused that with me. Was it just something in my brain? If I could be aware of more than one 'reality', and sometimes fall completely into another for awhile, and interacting with it, before snapping back 'here' (often with 10 minutes there being many hours lost here? ), what is to say that some 'cosmic' force could not be "pushing one over several frequencies" when they remote view? Getting, in the Casteneda sense, and entirely different reality or timeline? Like using the wa-wa bar (gee, is there a technical term for that? lol? ) on a guitar can distort all the notes evenly up or down -- the finger placement didn't change, the bridge the strings rests on did. The chord wasn't played wrong. The result is just different. Not 'wrong' - just DIFFERENT. Only wrong if someone doesn't know that feature exists and is measuring one chord and finding it off by not-quite-half-a-step. How this could happen in RV, I don't know. I do think though that although the session data is not matching the feedback, that considering the psychic functioning as being worse at that time is possibly not correct. Maybe it is not worse at connecting, it is simply better at displacing. Somehow. God knows to what. I agree with Greg that a huge amount of assumed "displacement" is a cross between random matching data (tons? ) and the interpretation of that later feedback as making the data 'psychic' (even if wrong? ) as actually altering the feedback for that session (hence mildly torquing the protocol and perhaps retrocausally producing the data in the first place! Ouch! I can't explain such a bizarre thing! :-? )? ). But until someone else tests more on the subject or has a theory I like better, I have decided that I'm going to consider a "possible correlation" between some background "dynamic" which might affect 'displacement' and which might affect 18 LST and which might in some way be related. Maybe I will try to start thinking more like Joe and look at my sessions not as 'right or wrong' but rather as 'matching or not matching the CURRENT feedback' (always subject to change? ). As if there is no reality, there is only the present. PJ

#1175

From: Bill Pendragon Date: Fri Nov 8, ?00? ?:04 am Subject: Re: A Crazy LST (sort of? ) theory docsavagebill Hi Pj, Well we are thinking the same thing...I already posted it below.. but in only a short paragraph. Bill* ----------------------------- Moderator's note: Cool. Gee whiz and after weeks of bouncing this in my head I still couldn't be succinct. That's one gift I guess I don't have, lol. PJ

#1184

From: "Greg Kolodziejzyk" Date: Fri Nov 8, ?00? 1?:57 pm Subject: RE: A Crazy LST (sort of? ) theory gregkolodzie... A bit more on the LST phenomenon: OK here is some VERY interesting information for you about LST. I just finished submitting this finding of mine where LST is related to SWS and that LST might not be anything - well, I had forgotten about this following thing and again, I will contradict myself. Totally. In a recent remote viewing experiment where they found ZERO effect overall, they also found ZERO effect at 13:00 LST (but, filtering out high SWS trials produced a significant effect - again, I am aware of tons of research that CONFIRMS the SWS relationship but NONE that confirm the LST relationship aside from James original paper? ) - anyhow, sorry, I got off track... at 13:00 hours they did find something that was significant in the order of like 8 standard deviations!!! (that's a z score of 8? ). What it was, and this might be a bit hard to explain, was that at 13:00 the subjects basically answered LESS questions about the target than at any other time by 8 standard deviations from the norm. They weren't more or less likely to be right or wrong, they were just less likely to have any RV perceptions at all. Greg K What's Greg doing now? http://www.ADVENTURESofGREG.com Sign up for the FREE ARV course: http://www.remote-viewing.com/coursemain.html
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group----------- Moderator's note: Er... so you're saying... maybe it's not that people are "simultaneously getting more data but being more wrong" but rather that at the "positive" effect high point they were getting very LITTLE data -- not better/worse than average, just so little it ended up with a better effect size than having lots of data (where more pieces are wrong? ). This would depend on the means of measuring accuracy (for effect size? ) wouldn't it? Hmmm. 8SD is gigantic. PJ

#1187

From: "Greg Kolodziejzyk" Date: Fri Nov 8, ?00? 6:10 pm Subject: RE: A Crazy LST (sort of? ) theory gregkolodzie... ------------------------------- Moderator's note: Er... so you're saying... maybe it's not that people are "simultaneously getting more data but being more wrong" but rather that at the "positive" effect high point they were getting very LITTLE data -- not better/worse than average, just so little it ended up with a better effect size than having lots of data (where more pieces are wrong? ). This would depend on the means of measuring accuracy (for effect size? ) wouldn't it? Hmmm. 8SD is gigantic. PJ
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group---------
~~--------ArchivedPostFollows_Yahoo-PJRV_group------------- Ya - I think it's a matter of noise. You get LESS noise at 13:00 LST, so the valid psi data is easier to discern. This *might* explain why it's possible to have great sessions at times other than 13:00 LST. Here's how I see it: I think we can measure psi two ways: 1. small bits of psi spread out all over space and time, ?. huge 'clumps' of psi that happen infrequently Both of these 'types' of psi are somehow environmentally moderated' - in other words, have nothing to do with the subjects ability. If we set up an experiment to measure psi by gathering up all the little bits, as almost ALL experiments are designed, then the noise overcomes the valid psi, and we measure a small effect size - or bigger effect size at a time when we know there will be less noise thereby allowing the true psi data to be seen (13:00 LST? ). However, if we set up an experiment to measure the huge mother loads of psi that happen infrequently, noise is much LESS of an issue because the psi impressions are easy to see and obvious - ie: "I see a boat under Niagara Falls" - and that's exactly the target. Or really precise predictions like "You know a person named John", and gosh darn wouldn't you know - my brothers best friends cousins name is John. Anyhow.... A way in which an experiment can be changed to measure BOTH types of psi, would be to rank and score the individual trials. Weakly scored trials might end up with a significant ES over time, but would probably be greater at 13:00 LST due to less noise overcoming the valid psi info. The higher scoring trials should be consistently successful - irregardless of LST. And this has been the case with my ARV trial data. Great scoring sessions are almost always correct and they can happen at ANY LST time. Just like great remote viewing sessions. gk [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#1190

From: "Scott Ellis" Date: Fri Nov 8, ?00? 8:?5 pm Subject: Re: A Crazy LST (sort of? ) theory scottrver Hi Greg, > In a recent remote viewing experiment where they found ZERO effect >overall, they also found ZERO effect at 13:00 LST (but, filtering out > high SWS trials produced a significant effect - again, I am aware > of tons of research that CONFIRMS the SWS relationship >but NONE that confirm the LST relationship > aside from James original paper? ) Damned conflicting data! I don't know what to make of it. In the data James and Ed May used for the paper "Anomalous Cognition Effect Size: Dependence on Sidereal Time and Solar Wind Parameters" they found that on its own there was little correlation (p=.? ) between solar wind speed and AC (anomalous cognition? ) effect size overall. However, when filtered by LST there was a negative correlation of effect size between 9.8 and 14.? LST, with a maximum at 1?.6 LST. Also there was a POSITIVE correlation of effect size at 15.6 LST. Scott

#1191

From: "Eva" Date: Fri Nov 8, ?00? 8:3? pm Subject: Re: A Crazy LST (sort of? ) theory k9caninek9 But if the 8SD is not replicable, that is kinda fishy and one must consider if there were other factors that may have influenced the original study. One of the basic tenents of scientific research is that results must be replicable. It seems to me a lot of rv lore may be built on a house of cards. A few studies are alluded to from time to time. Many of them are hearsay and we can't even get our hands on them. Others have not been repeated to see if they are replicable. Or if they have, then we don't hear about it. -E --- In pjrv...eg Kolodziejzyk" Moderator's note: Er... so you're saying... maybe it's not that >people are "simultaneously getting more data but being more wrong" >but rather that at the "positive" effect high point they were getting >very LITTLE data -- not better/worse than average, just so little it >ended up with a better effect size than having lots of data (where >more pieces are wrong? ). This would depend on the means of measuring >accuracy (for effect size? ) wouldn't it? Hmmm. 8SD is gigantic. PJ

#1?01

From: "Greg Kolodziejzyk" Date: Sat Nov 9, ?00? 1?:36 pm Subject: RE: Re: A Crazy LST (sort of? ) theory gregkolodzie... > E. wrote: > But if the 8SD is not replicable, that is kinda fishy and oh - I do think it should be replicable! It's just that it hasn't because as far as I know, there has not been this kind of experiment conducted before and measuring this particular effect in the past has been impossible. In this particular experiment, the subjects impressions about the target were submitted through the internet by answering a questionnaire about the target. As I said, there was no significant effect at ANY time, HOWEVER, at 13:00 LST, a very significant number of subjects chose to answer FEWER of the questions on the questionnaire. Regards, Greg K

// end archive

Top of Page

Remote Viewing info page spacer

RV Oasis / PJRV List Archives Menu

Dojo Psi Library, Archival Material, Remote Viewing and Psi

The RV Oasis / PJRV Discussion List Archives


Remote Viewing RV Oasis / PJRV Discussion list archives. Dojo Psi dot com / info