--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@...> wrote:
>
> I beleve they lost their funding through princeton so they had to go 
> independent. Hence marketing the randomometer thingie I suspect, to keep 
> raising funds.

That must be it, nice to know I'm not dreaming these things.
 
> L
> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- 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.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


Reply via email to