1
00:00:10,120 --> 00:00:06,710
well with the theme of the pragmatics of

2
00:00:13,310 --> 00:00:10,130
anomalies I decided to prepare a

3
00:00:17,029 --> 00:00:13,320
presentation about making associative

4
00:00:20,380 --> 00:00:17,039
remote viewing work practically just as

5
00:00:23,029 --> 00:00:20,390
a quick overview of what ARV is

6
00:00:25,070 --> 00:00:23,039
typically two alternate targets will be

7
00:00:27,259 --> 00:00:25,080
prepared or chosen from a larger pool

8
00:00:31,220 --> 00:00:27,269
each of them is associated with two

9
00:00:34,729 --> 00:00:31,230
possible outcomes for an event of some

10
00:00:37,310 --> 00:00:34,739
kind then a remote viewer generates a

11
00:00:39,260 --> 00:00:37,320
transcript an analyst compares the

12
00:00:41,110 --> 00:00:39,270
transcript with the two possible targets

13
00:00:43,700 --> 00:00:41,120
and decides which is a closer match

14
00:00:46,389 --> 00:00:43,710
usually there is an option to say that

15
00:00:49,490 --> 00:00:46,399
well neither of the matches this is all

16
00:00:51,229 --> 00:00:49,500
when the event is known again usually

17
00:00:53,479 --> 00:00:51,239
the associated target will be shown to

18
00:00:55,700 --> 00:00:53,489
the viewer as as ground truth there are

19
00:00:58,099 --> 00:00:55,710
some some viewers who think this kind of

20
00:00:59,510 --> 00:00:58,109
feedback is very important for refining

21
00:01:02,029 --> 00:00:59,520
and maintaining your skills there are

22
00:01:04,070 --> 00:01:02,039
others who say it doesn't matter in any

23
00:01:09,620 --> 00:01:04,080
case if the viewing is accurate it's a

24
00:01:12,649 --> 00:01:09,630
prediction of the event outcome now many

25
00:01:16,370 --> 00:01:12,659
long-term ARV projects seem to stabilize

26
00:01:17,300 --> 00:01:16,380
at about 55 to 60 percent accuracy some

27
00:01:19,249 --> 00:01:17,310
of them don't

28
00:01:22,280 --> 00:01:19,259
some of them continue to suffer decline

29
00:01:26,620 --> 00:01:22,290
effects and end up below 50 percent some

30
00:01:30,670 --> 00:01:26,630
of them may stabilize at higher values

31
00:01:33,050 --> 00:01:30,680
this this is a rather difficult project

32
00:01:34,280 --> 00:01:33,060
difficult issue to try to do research on

33
00:01:37,399 --> 00:01:34,290
because there are a lot of people who

34
00:01:39,770 --> 00:01:37,409
brag about their a arv potential they're

35
00:01:46,550 --> 00:01:39,780
relatively few who publish about it

36
00:01:49,639 --> 00:01:46,560
reliably the and most people feel that

37
00:01:52,160 --> 00:01:49,649
this 55 to 60 percent long-term accuracy

38
00:01:55,280 --> 00:01:52,170
level is not adequate for a working

39
00:01:58,990 --> 00:01:55,290
practical application the typical cause

40
00:02:02,990 --> 00:01:59,000
of error is what's called displacement

41
00:02:05,040 --> 00:02:03,000
I've experienced this as an analyst I've

42
00:02:08,070 --> 00:02:05,050
heard stories about it from

43
00:02:11,250 --> 00:02:08,080
many researchers it is really amazingly

44
00:02:13,590 --> 00:02:11,260
frustrating when the remote viewer gives

45
00:02:15,570 --> 00:02:13,600
you a beautifully detailed spot-on

46
00:02:21,290 --> 00:02:15,580
description of the target that he is

47
00:02:23,640 --> 00:02:21,300
never going to be shown and there are

48
00:02:26,430 --> 00:02:23,650
there's a considerable amount of

49
00:02:30,510 --> 00:02:26,440
theoretical puzzlement as to how and why

50
00:02:32,250 --> 00:02:30,520
this happens and a lot of people seem to

51
00:02:34,230 --> 00:02:32,260
believe that we need to overcome the

52
00:02:42,060 --> 00:02:34,240
displacement problem in order to get

53
00:02:43,680 --> 00:02:42,070
practical use out of ARV now chapter 3

54
00:02:45,960 --> 00:02:43,690
of Courtney Brown's remote viewing

55
00:02:48,180 --> 00:02:45,970
describes in detail a multi viewer

56
00:02:50,010 --> 00:02:48,190
experiment in which target choices were

57
00:02:54,090 --> 00:02:50,020
ultimately established by a draw in the

58
00:02:57,180 --> 00:02:54,100
Georgia cash for lottery it was not

59
00:02:59,850 --> 00:02:57,190
designed as an ARV attempt but its data

60
00:03:02,580 --> 00:02:59,860
could have been used for ARV because all

61
00:03:04,710 --> 00:03:02,590
the analyses were completed before the

62
00:03:09,270 --> 00:03:04,720
lottery draw established which targets

63
00:03:11,640 --> 00:03:09,280
were quote unquote right now Courtney

64
00:03:13,650 --> 00:03:11,650
himself says that in it right in the

65
00:03:15,360 --> 00:03:13,660
book that the project couldn't have

66
00:03:17,850 --> 00:03:15,370
turned a profit of had been set up as

67
00:03:19,260 --> 00:03:17,860
ARV because of various problems in the

68
00:03:22,350 --> 00:03:19,270
prediction which we're about to take a

69
00:03:26,120 --> 00:03:22,360
look at but he's actually wrong in

70
00:03:29,550 --> 00:03:26,130
saying that it couldn't have been used

71
00:03:31,410 --> 00:03:29,560
so to describe the experiment rather

72
00:03:32,970 --> 00:03:31,420
than ask everybody to quickly read a

73
00:03:37,860 --> 00:03:32,980
chapter of the book in the next two

74
00:03:40,650 --> 00:03:37,870
minutes the cash for lottery is the

75
00:03:42,960 --> 00:03:40,660
typical four random digits the four

76
00:03:46,410 --> 00:03:42,970
digit draw established sixteen binary

77
00:03:48,540 --> 00:03:46,420
target selections via unencoded in which

78
00:03:51,170 --> 00:03:48,550
each decimal digit determined a 4-bit

79
00:03:53,970 --> 00:03:51,180
sequence now there are 16 possible

80
00:03:57,270 --> 00:03:53,980
sequences there are only ten digits so

81
00:03:59,370 --> 00:03:57,280
that means that six of the 16 possible

82
00:04:02,610 --> 00:03:59,380
combinations did not correspond to any

83
00:04:04,620 --> 00:04:02,620
digit at all there were five viewers

84
00:04:08,490 --> 00:04:04,630
involved each of them generated sixteen

85
00:04:10,620 --> 00:04:08,500
viewings one for each what one one for

86
00:04:13,340 --> 00:04:10,630
each target pair for a total of 80

87
00:04:17,990 --> 00:04:15,680
viewer associations were split on each

88
00:04:20,270 --> 00:04:18,000
target pair that is supposing that you

89
00:04:23,000 --> 00:04:20,280
have targets a and B for a particular

90
00:04:26,090 --> 00:04:23,010
bit three viewers would be assigned to

91
00:04:27,980 --> 00:04:26,100
associate target a with the zero outcome

92
00:04:30,070 --> 00:04:27,990
and the other two would be assigned to

93
00:04:34,700 --> 00:04:30,080
associate target a with the one outcome

94
00:04:37,130 --> 00:04:34,710
that means that if everybody gets gets

95
00:04:40,670 --> 00:04:37,140
it right generates a correct prediction

96
00:04:42,770 --> 00:04:40,680
then it would you'd had see three of the

97
00:04:48,520 --> 00:04:42,780
viewers matching a and two of the

98
00:04:51,350 --> 00:04:48,530
matching B of the overall statistics

99
00:04:52,940 --> 00:04:51,360
again this this is published material

100
00:04:55,880 --> 00:04:52,950
right there in Courtney's book if you

101
00:04:57,680 --> 00:04:55,890
want to check up on it 40 of the 80 were

102
00:04:59,210 --> 00:04:57,690
hits in which the viewers transcript

103
00:05:03,260 --> 00:04:59,220
matched the target associated with the

104
00:05:05,240 --> 00:05:03,270
actual outcome 20 were displaced in that

105
00:05:07,370 --> 00:05:05,250
chapter he calls them switched although

106
00:05:12,590 --> 00:05:07,380
he talks about the displacement problem

107
00:05:15,140 --> 00:05:12,600
in other chapters ask him and 20 taught

108
00:05:16,610 --> 00:05:15,150
trials were undecidable the analyst

109
00:05:18,560 --> 00:05:16,620
couldn't establish a preference for

110
00:05:20,120 --> 00:05:18,570
either picture I was a little bit

111
00:05:22,640 --> 00:05:20,130
boggled when I realized that this had

112
00:05:25,270 --> 00:05:22,650
split in an exactly 50 percent 25

113
00:05:27,710 --> 00:05:25,280
percent 25 percent pattern but I mean

114
00:05:32,450 --> 00:05:27,720
round numbers come up now and then in

115
00:05:34,610 --> 00:05:32,460
research so 75 percent of the trials

116
00:05:38,660 --> 00:05:34,620
produced a target choice of some kind

117
00:05:40,580 --> 00:05:38,670
and 67 percent were correct that that's

118
00:05:43,100 --> 00:05:40,590
pretty good that's better than that

119
00:05:44,930 --> 00:05:43,110
background average I was referring to of

120
00:05:47,450 --> 00:05:44,940
course these were trained experienced

121
00:05:54,320 --> 00:05:47,460
viewers using a protocol that is

122
00:05:56,510 --> 00:05:54,330
supposed to be very good now what I saw

123
00:06:00,790 --> 00:05:56,520
when looking at this is that you could

124
00:06:05,780 --> 00:06:03,020
theoretically with the stats on

125
00:06:09,560 --> 00:06:05,790
individual trials coming out to 50% hit

126
00:06:12,740 --> 00:06:09,570
25% missed 25% no decision if you do a

127
00:06:15,890 --> 00:06:12,750
majority vote of 5 the corresponding

128
00:06:18,900 --> 00:06:15,900
stats are about two-thirds hits a little

129
00:06:22,620 --> 00:06:18,910
over 17% misses a little Oh

130
00:06:24,270 --> 00:06:22,630
fifteen percent no decisions for the the

131
00:06:28,500 --> 00:06:24,280
collection of all predictions on a

132
00:06:31,170 --> 00:06:28,510
particular bit that means that with 16

133
00:06:33,840 --> 00:06:31,180
bits that we're looking at we expect a

134
00:06:36,330 --> 00:06:33,850
little under three errors and somewhere

135
00:06:40,650 --> 00:06:36,340
between two and three tied votes with no

136
00:06:43,020 --> 00:06:40,660
decision and the outcome turns out to be

137
00:06:46,590 --> 00:06:43,030
exactly what we would expect from the

138
00:06:51,480 --> 00:06:46,600
individual trial statistics when you do

139
00:06:53,730 --> 00:06:51,490
a five-way majority vote well sorry I

140
00:06:57,300 --> 00:06:53,740
was pressing the advance instead of

141
00:06:59,640 --> 00:06:57,310
laser pointer there are three errors

142
00:07:02,450 --> 00:06:59,650
which I've marked in red which I hope is

143
00:07:05,310 --> 00:07:02,460
showing up on there and there are two

144
00:07:08,460 --> 00:07:05,320
undecidable cases where because there

145
00:07:11,040 --> 00:07:08,470
was either one or three can't make a

146
00:07:13,140 --> 00:07:11,050
decision on the individual trial the

147
00:07:19,230 --> 00:07:13,150
ones that could be decided were evenly

148
00:07:22,230 --> 00:07:19,240
split and that now if you look at the

149
00:07:23,490 --> 00:07:22,240
last row there from the encoding scheme

150
00:07:26,130 --> 00:07:23,500
it's gibberish

151
00:07:28,770 --> 00:07:26,140
two of these codes don't correspond to a

152
00:07:30,570 --> 00:07:28,780
number and the other two have an unknown

153
00:07:35,610 --> 00:07:30,580
bit in them so we can't tell what number

154
00:07:38,720 --> 00:07:35,620
they are if any now if we're thinking

155
00:07:42,900 --> 00:07:38,730
about trying to make on a RV application

156
00:07:45,920 --> 00:07:42,910
out of data like this we'd better

157
00:07:49,530 --> 00:07:45,930
anticipate that there will be errors

158
00:07:53,040 --> 00:07:49,540
five-five way majority vote is just not

159
00:07:56,610 --> 00:07:53,050
enough to eliminate potential long

160
00:08:01,320 --> 00:07:56,620
decisions now to evaluate how this would

161
00:08:02,430 --> 00:08:01,330
work as a ARV to create a design we need

162
00:08:06,000 --> 00:08:02,440
to forget about the fact that we

163
00:08:09,180 --> 00:08:06,010
actually know the target and think about

164
00:08:11,340 --> 00:08:09,190
what can we deduce from the actual

165
00:08:12,960 --> 00:08:11,350
experimental data that would have been

166
00:08:16,590 --> 00:08:12,970
in hand before the target was

167
00:08:18,540 --> 00:08:16,600
established now even without knowing the

168
00:08:21,180 --> 00:08:18,550
target we know that two bits are

169
00:08:24,180 --> 00:08:21,190
undetermined because we've got a split

170
00:08:26,760 --> 00:08:24,190
vote it's right there in the data we

171
00:08:28,890 --> 00:08:26,770
also know there have to be at least two

172
00:08:29,350 --> 00:08:28,900
errors because two of the digit codes

173
00:08:33,100 --> 00:08:29,360
don't

174
00:08:35,199 --> 00:08:33,110
correspond to valid numbers there could

175
00:08:38,949 --> 00:08:35,209
be more than two errors and in any case

176
00:08:43,710 --> 00:08:38,959
we don't know which bits of our 16-bit

177
00:08:45,819 --> 00:08:43,720
sequence are in error the solution is to

178
00:08:48,490 --> 00:08:45,829
systematically look at all of the

179
00:08:49,720 --> 00:08:48,500
possible four-digit draws that could

180
00:08:51,910 --> 00:08:49,730
have generated what was actually

181
00:08:54,400 --> 00:08:51,920
observed starting with the fewest

182
00:08:57,759 --> 00:08:54,410
possible errors and working our way up

183
00:09:00,699 --> 00:08:57,769
to larger numbers of errors the two

184
00:09:01,930 --> 00:09:00,709
undetermined bits give us for starting

185
00:09:04,269 --> 00:09:01,940
patterns for each of the possible

186
00:09:07,569 --> 00:09:04,279
assignment of values to those two bits

187
00:09:10,060 --> 00:09:07,579
that each could be either 0 or 1 we then

188
00:09:11,680 --> 00:09:10,070
add two errors there's no point in

189
00:09:14,139 --> 00:09:11,690
adding less than two because we know in

190
00:09:16,780 --> 00:09:14,149
advance that would be wrong three errors

191
00:09:19,600 --> 00:09:16,790
and so forth in each possible position

192
00:09:21,970 --> 00:09:19,610
in the sequence of 16 and see how many

193
00:09:26,889 --> 00:09:21,980
of those modified 16-bit sets give us

194
00:09:29,410 --> 00:09:26,899
valid four-digit sequences obviously the

195
00:09:31,269 --> 00:09:29,420
more errors we assume are present than

196
00:09:37,900 --> 00:09:31,279
the more possible four-digit sequences

197
00:09:40,900 --> 00:09:37,910
we find with if we assume the two errors

198
00:09:43,470 --> 00:09:40,910
that we know have to be there then there

199
00:09:46,930 --> 00:09:43,480
are 12 possible four-digit sequences

200
00:09:48,670 --> 00:09:46,940
that grows fairly rapidly with three

201
00:09:50,680 --> 00:09:48,680
errors there could be a hundred and

202
00:09:53,050 --> 00:09:50,690
thirty sequences that led to this target

203
00:09:56,310 --> 00:09:53,060
pattern with four there could be six