--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@...> wrote: > > That's weird. The PEAR website says that they DO find a consistent change > during large Yogic Flying assemblies, but in the opposite direction from what > is observed with other world events.
Yeah, if you flip a coin a hundred times you get apparent anomalies that disappear over time hence why they didn't get any results from the course I enquired about. And there is so much yogic "flying" going on that there shouldn't be any randomness at all! I see they are still at it though, I remember them giving up a few years ago. > L. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > > > Actually Dean Radin of the Noetic Institute did some back in the day, or > > > so I recall. > > > > > > The people who used to work at the Princeton Engineering Anomalies > > > Research (PEAR) group got into the business of marketing a home "real > > > random number" generator so that you too, could participate in their > > > global research project and I believe they worked with Radin and with > > > Orme-Johnson of MUM on a project in Fairfield some years back. > > > > > > http://icrl.org/ > > > > Yes, the project was abandoned I recall, for the usual reason with > > paranormal research, that of non-repeatabiltity. Sooner or later > > the apparent anomalies disappear into the background noise and you > > get left with everyday randomness. Which is what has happened with > > ME experiments I think, if they ever had any good results really! > > > > I wrote to the princeton conciousness group once, I had been on > > a WPA and was interested if they had any unexplained blips for > > the time the course was on. They hadn't. I was very sceptical > > by then but there's no harm in trying and they were most interested > > in the concept of the Marshy effect. Ah well you've got to try > > but without a mechanism for how it would only affect brains in a > > "coherence creating" manner without affecting anything else it's > > going to be a tough sell. > > > > > L > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Yifu" <yifuxero@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes...from Wired, Sept 2012: > > > > > > ... > > > > > > "But now scientists at the Australian National University have > > > > > > introduced a technique for generating 5.7 billion truly random > > > > > > values per second. They do it by harnessing the fundamental > > > > > > uncertainity of the universe. Their technique measures quantum > > > > > > phenomena in a box completely devoid of photons, where ghostly > > > > > > virtual particles randomly burble in and out of existence 24/7. > > > > > > "God does not play dice," Einstein famously quipped in response to > > > > > > evidence that randomness rules the cosmos. Luckily, he was wrong". > > > > > > (Wired article by Jonathon Keats). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There have been devices purporting to generate "real" random numbers > > > > > available for years. It is possible that this particular one is "more > > > > > random" than the others, but using radioactive decay as the source > > > > > for random numbers has been used for years. > > > > > > > > The big question for us is what affect do super siddhi brains > > > > have on the ability to generate random numbers? Ought to do > > > > something if it can create "positivity" at a distance. > > > > > > > > This is the sort of experiment MUM could do and then come up > > > > with an explanation as to why some things are affected and not > > > > others. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Using virtual particles, which is what they are apparently doing, > > > > > seems pretty cool though. > > > > > > > > > > L. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
