A
Anonymous
Guest
It looks good.
Remote Viewing Experiments (How To; Conducted Online)
- Thread starter rynner2
- Start date
-
- Tags
- remote viewing
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2003
- Messages
- 3,268
Personally I think it would be more interesting to keep the subject, object and their location of the RV secret to those taking part in the test and only allowing those who are to score the results to know who it is.
I don't know whether this is protocol in RV tests but could it cut down on 'lucky' guesses based on a previous knowledge of the culture/interests/gender of the subject if already known to those taking part in the RV?
I don't know whether this is protocol in RV tests but could it cut down on 'lucky' guesses based on a previous knowledge of the culture/interests/gender of the subject if already known to those taking part in the RV?
I feel we need to have a degree of flexibility - not so much a protocol as a set of protocols we can employ as needed.
Hence the more feed back we get, the greater the pool of sound method we can draw on the construct the tests, one by one.
Later this evening, I'll gather together my thoughts, and put together a digest of the suggestions so far.
But for now, what do we need to think about?
How to select the image.
How to project the
image (if at all)
How much stimulus (and what kind) should the viewer be allowed.
How long should the viewer be permitted?
How many viewers may participate?
How many projectors?
How many judges, their criteria, and how much interaction may be permitted between them, and of course with the viewers?
How much 'noise' can we permit on the dedicated thread?
If we can answer these questions (and more than one valid answer is possible and welcome) then we can crack on. Each test, the protocols can be clearly laid out for all concerned.
This is as much about testing protocols as it is about exploring RV/telepathy, so I don't think anybody need feel any anxieity about a profusion of counsel. Let's play each round as it comes
Hence the more feed back we get, the greater the pool of sound method we can draw on the construct the tests, one by one.
Later this evening, I'll gather together my thoughts, and put together a digest of the suggestions so far.
But for now, what do we need to think about?
How to select the image.
How to project the
image (if at all)
How much stimulus (and what kind) should the viewer be allowed.
How long should the viewer be permitted?
How many viewers may participate?
How many projectors?
How many judges, their criteria, and how much interaction may be permitted between them, and of course with the viewers?
How much 'noise' can we permit on the dedicated thread?
If we can answer these questions (and more than one valid answer is possible and welcome) then we can crack on. Each test, the protocols can be clearly laid out for all concerned.
This is as much about testing protocols as it is about exploring RV/telepathy, so I don't think anybody need feel any anxieity about a profusion of counsel. Let's play each round as it comes
Thoughts on Procedure
In any given experiment, we will have viewers, projectors/selectors & adjudicators.
Viewers will attempt to remote view the image, object or place the porjector/selector chooses.
Projectors/selectors will choose and concentrate upon the image, place or object the viewers will attempt to view.
Adjudicators will administer the protocol and grade the results.
I suggest the following as a modal for a standard test:
The viewer(s), selectors & adjudicators are selected from the pool of volunteers by the thread adminsistrators (a definitive list of whom will be drawn up).
The selectors choose for themselves, or are given, a target, which is approved by the thread admin.
Then, the target is past around the adjudicators, who will submit there list of keywords to the Admin before the test begins. The adjudicators will also be brought up to speed on the specific protocols for the experiment.
The selectors will be asked to concentrate upon the target at certain times for a certain period of time. They will have no contact with the viewers for the duration of the test.
The viewers will be informed of when the selector will be concentrating upon the image, and how long the test will last. They will be asked to submit their observations to a 'sock-puppet' pm address, which can only be accessed by the thread admin and the adjudicators for that test.
When the test has finished, the adjuds can report onto the thread, and the contents of the 'psi sock' can be published.
Should the viewers know the selectors/projectors? It depends - let's be flexible. Likewise, should adjudicators confer? Again, let's try it from all angles. The essential thing is to set a definite set of parametres upon each round.
For the next round...I suggest a single selctor-projector, working with an image they have chosen (although submitted for approval first). The projector will focus on the image twice a day (at noon & at midnight) GMT for 3 days. Multiple viewers are welcome.
Any thoughts?
Remember - all of the above is my callow, amateur opinion - I welcome and hope for it?s vicious deconstruction by those who know much better
In any given experiment, we will have viewers, projectors/selectors & adjudicators.
Viewers will attempt to remote view the image, object or place the porjector/selector chooses.
Projectors/selectors will choose and concentrate upon the image, place or object the viewers will attempt to view.
Adjudicators will administer the protocol and grade the results.
I suggest the following as a modal for a standard test:
The viewer(s), selectors & adjudicators are selected from the pool of volunteers by the thread adminsistrators (a definitive list of whom will be drawn up).
The selectors choose for themselves, or are given, a target, which is approved by the thread admin.
Then, the target is past around the adjudicators, who will submit there list of keywords to the Admin before the test begins. The adjudicators will also be brought up to speed on the specific protocols for the experiment.
The selectors will be asked to concentrate upon the target at certain times for a certain period of time. They will have no contact with the viewers for the duration of the test.
The viewers will be informed of when the selector will be concentrating upon the image, and how long the test will last. They will be asked to submit their observations to a 'sock-puppet' pm address, which can only be accessed by the thread admin and the adjudicators for that test.
When the test has finished, the adjuds can report onto the thread, and the contents of the 'psi sock' can be published.
Should the viewers know the selectors/projectors? It depends - let's be flexible. Likewise, should adjudicators confer? Again, let's try it from all angles. The essential thing is to set a definite set of parametres upon each round.
For the next round...I suggest a single selctor-projector, working with an image they have chosen (although submitted for approval first). The projector will focus on the image twice a day (at noon & at midnight) GMT for 3 days. Multiple viewers are welcome.
Any thoughts?
Remember - all of the above is my callow, amateur opinion - I welcome and hope for it?s vicious deconstruction by those who know much better
A
Anonymous
Guest
Personaly, I'd like to have the choice of sender (from a pool) determined by the reciever. I'd like the S to have some knowledge of either relaxation, meditation, yoga etc,. I'd be interested to work with an S who chooses working with an entheogen sacrament.Alexius said:
Can't that be worked between the S&R? I claim to work with a particular method, I am sure others have their own technique. Maybe different tech's could be compared by result.
I believe the key here is to take every case on it's own merits. The viewer ought to be a part of that decision making process - the important thing being that a procedure for each round is established, and is 'transparent' - everything ought to be a matter of record when the day is done, so folk can judge for themselves the value of what has transpired.
In my view, creating a confortable environment for everybody concerned is of prime importance. We do this cos we enjoy it - so let's make it enjoyable!
But also, let's make it an intriguing document.
Part of that will involve keeping discussion of procedures and results off the thread - this thread can be adopted as the 'smoking room' for participants and visitors.
I wonder - can we limit access to the experimental thread (for posting -not viewing)? Can we create a special pm account for the thread?
In my view, creating a confortable environment for everybody concerned is of prime importance. We do this cos we enjoy it - so let's make it enjoyable!
But also, let's make it an intriguing document.
Part of that will involve keeping discussion of procedures and results off the thread - this thread can be adopted as the 'smoking room' for participants and visitors.
I wonder - can we limit access to the experimental thread (for posting -not viewing)? Can we create a special pm account for the thread?
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2002
- Messages
- 19,406
Lucianarchy said:
Although I don't know what you mean by "entheogen sacrament" (well someone who believes in the God within) but I'd be against the receiver picking the sender - down that road lie accusations of collusion.
I was actually pondering an anonymous sender but I think it better if the receiver knows who it is - as Alexius seems to have done such a good job I'd be in favour of them keeping the position of sender - although if anyone else wants to give it a go then that would be fine by me too (although I'd lie to keep Alexius as sender for a couple of goes just to get things straightened out).
We get a number of images together and then pick one at random (so people can't guess based on the person who supplied an image) - I'll PM some stock photo sites to Alexius as we can flesh out the pool of photos with random picks from there.
The image shouldn't be too complex and must have a well defined feel.
Arrangements for the actual sending to be arranged ahead of time with the judges and the receiver (e.g. times and whether it requires meditation or not).
3 independent judges.
Judges see the image and note down keywords that occur to them.
Judges mark on that 5 point system and provide a written overview.
No communication between the receiver and the sender or the judges that isn't via the thread.
I would be interested in having a control receiver who doesn't think they have any abilities so we can see how close guessing can get people.
Thoughts?
Clearly as it isn't in a lab we can't exclude some blatant cheating - like the sender sending the reciever the image via email but we are only doing this for inclusion in a journal or anything just to see if we can get some interesting results so cheating seems pretty pointless and a waste of everyone's time - we also trust those invovled to keep things above board in the spirit of open-mnded inquiry
Emps
I agree with the above - a known, charming sender () whose images are chosen from an unseen stock.
Control viewers are a good idea - any takers?
I'm willing to take the sending seat for a few rounds, but ultimately we should broaden participation.
So, any volunteers to adjudicate or view?
So far, we have Lucian as a definite viewer, and Hugo has volunteered as an adjudicator.
I'll send - Emps will act as overall co-ordinator and Basileus
) whose images are chosen from an unseen stock.Control viewers are a good idea - any takers?
I'm willing to take the sending seat for a few rounds, but ultimately we should broaden participation.
So, any volunteers to adjudicate or view?
So far, we have Lucian as a definite viewer, and Hugo has volunteered as an adjudicator.
I'll send - Emps will act as overall co-ordinator and Basileus
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2002
- Messages
- 13,692
(arrives, panting heavily)
Sorry I'm late! Just posted to the JREF thread with my take on the first version of the experiment.
Agree with Emps that sender should be anonymous - whilst I have no doubt that the experiment would be still conducted with the utmost integrity should Luci know who was projecting the image, there are those who would immediately dismiss any results gleaned from such a modus operandi.
I would be willing to not actively participate in the experiment, but a) have access to the image, b ) select a volunteer to project the image (selected from those that put themselves forward, by PM, to me, with as much thought given to Luci's stated requirements as possible) this last I would keep to myself, obviously. In addition, I would keep secret the names of all those who volunteered, so no deductions can be made. All would be revealed at the end.
This way no-one bar would know the image bar the controls, but no-one would know who was projecting bar themselves and me. I would merely monitor the thread silently until the conclusion (and of course could edit out comments that may be seen as leading as soon as they appeared, if necessary).
How does that sound?
[edit] just read above post - this timed out three times
so typed it before above was posted[/edit]
Sorry I'm late! Just posted to the JREF thread with my take on the first version of the experiment.
Agree with Emps that sender should be anonymous - whilst I have no doubt that the experiment would be still conducted with the utmost integrity should Luci know who was projecting the image, there are those who would immediately dismiss any results gleaned from such a modus operandi.
I would be willing to not actively participate in the experiment, but a) have access to the image, b ) select a volunteer to project the image (selected from those that put themselves forward, by PM, to me, with as much thought given to Luci's stated requirements as possible) this last I would keep to myself, obviously. In addition, I would keep secret the names of all those who volunteered, so no deductions can be made. All would be revealed at the end.
This way no-one bar would know the image bar the controls, but no-one would know who was projecting bar themselves and me. I would merely monitor the thread silently until the conclusion (and of course could edit out comments that may be seen as leading as soon as they appeared, if necessary).
How does that sound?
[edit] just read above post - this timed out three times
so typed it before above was posted[/edit]I like it - nice way of conducting a blind test.
Personally, I favour both tests with known viewers and blind tests - will be interesting to see what difference, if any, that makes.
If we can minimise that chance for conceivable collusion, we should - but ultimately, we are working on a message board, and we can never be water-tight. It is worth aspiring to, though.
Personally, I favour both tests with known viewers and blind tests - will be interesting to see what difference, if any, that makes.
If we can minimise that chance for conceivable collusion, we should - but ultimately, we are working on a message board, and we can never be water-tight. It is worth aspiring to, though.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Stu, thanks for your help.
Great suggestions, all of them, from everyone.
All I'd like to add is that this is just an internet forum after all is said and done. Cynics and pseudo-skeptics already have their beliefs. It makes no difference to them. We're doing this, well, because we can, aren't we? Not because we're trying to prove anything, these are just explorations, finding what sort of environment the snark will settle in.
Until I know more people here, and get a feel for their positivity, I'd rather Alexius was the sender.
Great suggestions, all of them, from everyone.
All I'd like to add is that this is just an internet forum after all is said and done. Cynics and pseudo-skeptics already have their beliefs. It makes no difference to them. We're doing this, well, because we can, aren't we? Not because we're trying to prove anything, these are just explorations, finding what sort of environment the snark will settle in.
Until I know more people here, and get a feel for their positivity, I'd rather Alexius was the sender.
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2001
- Messages
- 1,587
I volunteer.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Actually, Stu. Would you like to have a go at 'sending' for me?
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2002
- Messages
- 19,406
Alexius said:
Tezcatlipoca volunteered here:
http://www.forteantimes.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=330151#post330151
So if they are up for that then they seem a good choice.
Basileus eh?
You know what happened last time someone called me something like that??
I went off and Googled it up like I'm doing now...........
[edit: Damn this has been timing out for about half an hour and everyone has posted in between.
I found Basileus:
does that mean I'm going to be throwin the sea? Its been done before but............
Ahhhhhhhhhhh or:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/basileus
seems like a variant of Emperoring so count me in
]Emps
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2002
- Messages
- 13,692
I will confer with the other "controls" and get back to you - I'll certainly consider it.Lucianarchy said:
Thank you for asking
.Nice one Liz! Would you consider adjudication and viewing as well?
I think the first couple of rounds will probably have me as sender with Lucian - then when Lucian feels more comfortable, I will step back out of the lime light
However, other viewers are welcome, and I see no reason why we can't have more than one test taking place at the same time (given a little organisational work on our part). In which case, the more volunteers in the pool, the better.
I think the first couple of rounds will probably have me as sender with Lucian - then when Lucian feels more comfortable, I will step back out of the lime light
However, other viewers are welcome, and I see no reason why we can't have more than one test taking place at the same time (given a little organisational work on our part). In which case, the more volunteers in the pool, the better.
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2001
- Messages
- 1,587
Yes, as required; although I have never attempted to remote view previously.
A
Anonymous
Guest
lizard23 said:
OK, thank you. What (how) would you choose to use (it)?
Are you volunteering to act as a sender?
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2002
- Messages
- 13,692
Having conferred with the others, yes, I'll do it. Ideal time for me would be next Monday and/or Tuesday night (too many distractions otherwise this weekend).
How's that with you, Luci?
A
Anonymous
Guest
Alexius said:
Look forward to it. s
Stu, how are you going to get to the 'crossroads' (as described for Alexius in the other thread)?
A
Anonymous
Guest
stu neville said:
OK. Let's make it happen.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2002
- Messages
- 19,406
Super I've just spoken to Stu and Alexius and that all seems to be good. I think we will need two judges though as Alexius is overseeing and Stu is sending (and lizard23 is a second/control receiver).
Emps
Emps
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2001
- Messages
- 1,587
Well : I currently practice a form of meditation and visualization daily in a ritual setting for which I occasionally consume psychedelics : most frequently using a well-known herbal smoking mixture , but infrequently psilocybe semilancea mushrooms and/or nitrous oxide. :devil:
I was hoping that the "sending" could be worked into this.
Simply as part of the daily work the sending could be repeated daily for as long as required and will be in a state of consciousness altered through ritual alone or ritual use of cannabis as per your preference
I can perform the daily work either at approximately 8am or any time in the evening up until midnight as required.
Stronger stuff is mid-afternoon Saturday only by prior arrangement :blissed:
I can perform any visualization or other method you may find helpful.
, but infrequently psilocybe semilancea mushrooms and/or nitrous oxide. :devil: I was hoping that the "sending" could be worked into this.
Simply as part of the daily work the sending could be repeated daily for as long as required and will be in a state of consciousness altered through ritual alone or ritual use of cannabis as per your preference
I can perform the daily work either at approximately 8am or any time in the evening up until midnight as required.
Stronger stuff is mid-afternoon Saturday only by prior arrangement :blissed:
I can perform any visualization or other method you may find helpful.
As Emps said, we are off!
Here is the set up so far.
I will oversee the proceedings. I will select 10 images, which will be numbered 1 through ten - then later this evening I will ask some lucky punter to pick a number.
I will then pass that image to Stu, who will act as projector. He will project on Monday, Tuesday & Wednesday evenings.
Lucian will receive. Lizard 23 is also cordially invited to view as well. A third viewer is welcome. Anybody?
We need three judges - any takers?
More details will be posted over the next few days, as we sort out the technicalities.
Issued this day, 14 Zilhijje 1424, anno hijjri
Here is the set up so far.
I will oversee the proceedings. I will select 10 images, which will be numbered 1 through ten - then later this evening I will ask some lucky punter to pick a number.
I will then pass that image to Stu, who will act as projector. He will project on Monday, Tuesday & Wednesday evenings.
Lucian will receive. Lizard 23 is also cordially invited to view as well. A third viewer is welcome. Anybody?
We need three judges - any takers?
More details will be posted over the next few days, as we sort out the technicalities.
Issued this day, 14 Zilhijje 1424, anno hijjri
A
Anonymous
Guest
lizard23 said:Well : I currently practice a form of meditation and visualization daily in a ritual setting for which I occasionally consume psychedelics : most frequently using a well-known herbal smoking mixture
I was hoping that the "sending" could be worked into this.
Simply as part of the daily work the sending could be repeated daily for as long as required and will be in a state of consciousness altered through ritual alone or ritual use of cannabis as per your preference
I can perform the daily work either at approximately 8am or any time in the evening up until midnight as required.
Stronger stuff is mid-afternoon Saturday only by prior arrangement :blissed:
I can perform any visualization or other method you may find helpful.
It's up to you, but only natural substances and those associated with less risk, marijuana or psilocybin seem reasonable entheogens for the sort of journey / projection we're talking about.
Good luck with your viewing, maybe you could try sending the week after. Be safe.
Best wishes,
L.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2002
- Messages
- 19,406
Alexius said:
It would be useful if the third viewer was 'psychically inert' (i.e. they've never seen a ghost or had any paranormal experiences) but were interested in trying it
I don't think I'm invovled in anything else so I'll be a judge if I'm not 'compromised' by being in on the planning.
Emps
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2001
- Messages
- 1,587
Invitation cordially accepted
To be honest I am pretty psychically inert myself : I'm just a stoned magician not a polt-haunted ufo abductee or anything ....
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2002
- Messages
- 61
I can view also, if you need a third person.