Return Home
It is currently Tue Sep 29, 2020 5:53 pm

All times are UTC-06:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:16 am 
Offline
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2020 11:20 pm
Posts: 3
Hello, I came across Tom's experiments and then found out he's having them performed at the university I attended, so that peaked my interest. So I looked over the experiments shown here: https://cusac.eu/experiments/
And it seems to me that if the assumptions are correct, there would be some big implications and real-world applications here. For example, if the assumptions in experiment 4, and experiment 2B are correct (that you can predict a random number before it's chosen, and that the result can determine the injection input data before it's injected), then you should be able to do things like predict the winning lottery numbers before they are chosen.

So here is a way I thought of to scale up experiments 2B and 4, where if those assumptions are correct, it seems to me the same logic should allow the following to take place, and predict the lottery results.


Based on https://cusac.eu/experiment-2b/:

Scaled up experiment to generate yet-to-be-chosen winning lottery numbers:
1. After a particle is fired, the result on the screen (diffraction pattern or particle pattern) is observed only by person A. R1 is inactive at this point, and the signal is suspended between D1/D2 and R1, and if R1 were to activate, it would store the result.
2. This process is repeated among additional separate apparatuses, where the binary results of diffraction pattern or particle pattern (0 or 1) is concatenated and converted to decimal value (representing lottery numbers). Person A buys a lottery ticket with these numbers.
3. A period of time later (it shouldn't matter how long), person B chooses any number they wish (the winning lottery numbers in this case), converts them to binary values (0 or 1) and injects these values at the w-w injection point, after the signal passes D1/D2 but before reaching R1, and R1 then stores the result; this is performed among each apparatus in the same order the particles were fired.

The prediction is the number that person B injected will match the result person A previously observed on the screen (0 for diffraction pattern, 1 for particle pattern). Therefore person A can predict what the future lottery numbers will be, since those are the numbers person B will have to inject in order to result in the pattern observed by the particle. Otherwise, it would be possible to know the "w-w data" the particle traveled if the result was a diffraction pattern for that particle - which contradicts particle-wave complementarity. So you may be wondering, what if person B chose to not enter the winning lottery numbers in order to try and contradict the initial output pattern? Well that would mean the results wouldn't have been the winning lottery numbers to begin with, since they have to match what person B injected. So there is no possibility of "tricking" the system. That's why it's necessary for the knowledge of the results to not influence person B's injection. That also answers this question by Tom in experiment 2B:
Quote:
An interesting variation: if the necessary timing can be achieved (roughly, particle travel time from slits to result screen + algorithm computation time + light speed time from R3 to R1) < delayed detector signal travel time from slits to w-w injector located just before R1), the experiment would be able to turn the w-w device on or off to directly contradict the algorithms prediction immediately after the prediction has been made but before the particle reaches the w-w device.

That would produce wave (diffraction) patterns with recorded w-w data available and particle patterns without any available w-w data recorded — both in direct conflict with particle-wave complementarity.
In other words, the output (whether a person knowing the results, or a machine having recorded the results) can't do anything that would influence the injection (input). A different entity with no knowledge of the output results would need to make the injection. Otherwise, if the injector had knowledge of the output, they would have knowledge of the w-w data which would mean the result would have been a particle pattern to begin with, in that case. This is the same concept as in the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative method based on https://cusac.eu/experiment-4/:

1. After the particle is fired, the result on the screen (diffraction pattern or particle pattern) is observed only by person A. R1 and R2 are USB flash drives, they are turned on but their data is not analyzed.
2. Person B chooses whether to destroy the R1 and R2 USB flash drives (corresponding to a 0 or 1).

This method can be scaled up in the same way the first method was scaled up (using multiple machines to convert binary "0 or 1" to decimal numbers).

The predicted result is that if person B chose to destroy R1 and R2, this would correspond to a diffraction pattern of the particle that person A previously observed. Therefore person A can predict what person B's decision will be, since they will always correspond with one another.



This logic seems sound to me if Tom's initial assumptions are correct, and seems to be supported by the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment. From those assumptions, it shouldn't matter whether a random number is injected, or a predetermined number is injected, as long as the injector doesn't know the output result, since that would influence the injector's decision.
Would it make a difference whether a conscious entity or a machine knows which numbers are being injected? I don't think so, as long as they aren't influenced by, or have knowledge of the result screen data. Whether a robot or a human injects the numbers, it shouldn't make a difference if the numbers are random or are any numbers that the injector chooses as long as the result screen data isn't known to the injector at this point. I believe both cases should work, if the input determines the output and the output determines the input (shown in delayed choice quantum eraser), since they cannot contradict each other in order to preserve particle-wave complementarity.

What do you guys think?


Top
PostPosted: Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:17 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 6233
Location: Ocala, FL
The system won't let you pick Lottery numbers. Doing that reinforces ego and that is asking the LCS to work against itself. I remember when I was living in CA I had a lottery ticket with all the numbers one number off. You will find a lot of stories like that.


Top
PostPosted: Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:50 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 11:44 am
Posts: 1269
Not exactly the same as picking lotto numbers but remote viewers have been able to predict the stock market and make money on it. Here’s some relatively recent research.

Check out Russell Targ and Ingo Swann also(mentioned in the article).

http://psiphen.colorado.edu/Pubs/Smith14.pdf

Here’s a video on how to remote view lotto numbers.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ObeI82f5OmI

I don’t know if there has been any academic research on this specifically but I don’t have much doubt that there are those that are capable of doing it.


Top
PostPosted: Sun Jan 19, 2020 1:55 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 6233
Location: Ocala, FL
I suspect that the LCS didn't interfere because this was being done as an experiment, and so might open some people's mind. But for someone to do this on a regular basis is unlikely.

Tom has talked about his many times:

TMI November 2017 Day 3 - 31:1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xV-NTJC ... &t=0h31m1s


Top
PostPosted: Sun Jan 19, 2020 3:21 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 11:44 am
Posts: 1269
Yes, it is typically easier to focus intent into starting a business or learning a useful skill and get a decent job if the goal is just to make money.

It is interesting that so few people know about such abilities and even when they do they write it off as silly woo woo. I think the people who run the banks, lottery, governments and stock markets have a vested interest in keeping this knowledge socially unacceptable so that people don’t get the nudge. They remain tools of the system and the system administration.

What would happen to the control system if this kind of information gets out and enough people realize their full potential? Likely destruction of the system and those who depend on it I think.

Tom is quite the rebel, supporting the spreading and advancement of this kind of knowledge. He is trying to help open minds. Tom is a dangerous person to many with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.


Top
PostPosted: Mon Jan 20, 2020 12:20 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 11:17 pm
Posts: 302
Location: Scotland
Anonymous internet quote, "The world is run by those that can get others to operate within the myths they generate".

Hopefully Tom Campbell and others can bring in enough information to shake that up a bit.

_________________
“It’s better to light a candle than to curse the dark” K’naan (In the Beginning)


Top
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:24 pm 
Offline
Newbie
Newbie

Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2020 11:20 pm
Posts: 3
Quote:
The system won't let you pick Lottery numbers. Doing that reinforces ego and that is asking the LCS to work against itself. I remember when I was living in CA I had a lottery ticket with all the numbers one number off. You will find a lot of stories like that.
I used that as an example to show how big of an impact this could have, but in reality you'd be able to predict just about anything using this method. For example if you want to know who will win the 2020 election, you could correspond candidate 1 to a diffraction pattern on the result screen, and candidate 2 to a particle pattern. And the w-w data is stored but not looked at, and then when the day of the election comes, somebody with no knowledge of the result screen destroys or analyzes the w-w data corresponding to which candidate won. So if candidate 1 won, the person would destroy the w-w data and the initial result screen would have to (even retroactively) match the election winner.
I don't know anything about remote viewing, but this method would take no skill or training or special abilities to utilize, you'd only need the necessary equipment (if it works, that is).

I just came across this article (https://www.technologyreview.com/s/6130 ... sion=true ) that seems to perfectly describe this very scenario, which they were able to experimentally prove:
Quote:
Wigner’s original thought experiment is straightforward in principle. It begins with a single polarized photon that, when measured, can have either a horizontal polarization or a vertical polarization. But before the measurement, according to the laws of quantum mechanics, the photon exists in both polarization states at the same time—a so-called superposition.

Wigner imagined a friend in a different lab measuring the state of this photon and storing the result, while Wigner observed from afar. Wigner has no information about his friend’s measurement and so is forced to assume that the photon and the measurement of it are in a superposition of all possible outcomes of the experiment.

Wigner can even perform an experiment to determine whether this superposition exists or not. This is a kind of interference experiment showing that the photon and the measurement are indeed in a superposition.

From Wigner’s point of view, this is a “fact”—the superposition exists. And this fact suggests that a measurement cannot have taken place.

But this is in stark contrast to the point of view of the friend, who has indeed measured the photon’s polarization and recorded it. The friend can even call Wigner and say the measurement has been done (provided the outcome is not revealed).

So the two realities are at odds with each other. “This calls into question the objective status of the facts established by the two observers,” say Proietti and co.
Quote:
The experiment produces an unambiguous result. It turns out that both realities can coexist even though they produce irreconcilable outcomes, just as Wigner predicted.


Top
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2020 5:18 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 4:47 am
Posts: 1061
Location: Tampa Bay, Florida
Quote:
The system won't let you pick Lottery numbers. Doing that reinforces ego and that is asking the LCS to work against itself. I remember when I was living in CA I had a lottery ticket with all the numbers one number off. You will find a lot of stories like that.
Linda,

so this was identical to the story that Tom shared from the video, with all your "digits" being off one number ?


Top
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2020 2:42 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 6233
Location: Ocala, FL
Yes, this happened to me in the mid 1970s long before I'd ever heard of MBT.


Top
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2020 3:18 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 4:47 am
Posts: 1061
Location: Tampa Bay, Florida
Quote:
Yes, this happened to me in the mid 1970s long before I'd ever heard of MBT.
Okay , this makes more sense to me now, .. and so my first thoughts were.., this did not sound at all like our more recent MBT- Linda, that you would be buying Lottery tickets.. But a younger Linda well before MBT ?.. okay,.. that I could see i think..

Seems to fit well the Digital, repetitive, lesson oriented, sub -routine, parsimony , ..system...


Top
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2020 9:47 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster

Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 11:44 am
Posts: 1269
Buffering...............Working.................compiling.............processing.............:)


Top
PostPosted: Sat Feb 01, 2020 5:14 pm 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 4:47 am
Posts: 1061
Location: Tampa Bay, Florida
Quote:
Yes, this happened to me in the mid 1970s long before I'd ever heard of MBT.

Linda,


the California state lottery didnt start until 1985..


Top
PostPosted: Sun Feb 02, 2020 9:54 am 
Offline
Power Poster
Power Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:54 pm
Posts: 6233
Location: Ocala, FL
I meant the late in the 80s. I I moved there in 1987 and left in 1993.


Top
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 

All times are UTC-06:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited