Friends and lovers

Project Home Page

RVwebForum

TKR @the Dojo Psi

Help make it possible for everyone.

RV CHAT

Monday Nights
9:30-11:30pm Eastern
6:30-8:30pm Pacific
dojopsi.com/chat/

Weekly RV Chat

CS Labs
Ingo Swann
Joe McMoneagle

Baylands Nature Preserve
Pete's Harbor Restaurant
Lucid Dream Example
Radio Listening Post
Test-Bed Trials
Video ABC Put to the Test

The Home Made Viewer

P.I.A.

TKR Blog

Noetic Vision

Serious Kilowatt

Red Cairo

Cosmic Spoon

Psychic Journey

Psyforce

Remote Review

MindBlogging

BadMoJoe

Dojo Blog

Firedocs RV Blog

the McMoneagles

LFR/CSL

RV Roast (alt)

RV Library

[waterway]

I want to know if anyone can tell me that viewers, taskers and monitors who are close, who share a strong interpersonal relationship, are more successful in their RV efforts.  I read an article years ago that suggested that "new lovers" did better on zener card tests than strangers and "long term couples".  

Does this seem true from your experience, and if so.... why?

[PJ]

Howdy waterway,

This topic wasn't nearly as scandalous as the title made me think it might be.  

I have been told about research which indicated that scores in parapsychology seemed slightly better for persons with relationships: parent/child, spouses, etc.  

I mentioned on another thread, a very experienced cabalist friend of mine once told me, on hearing about that research, that persons highly attracted to each other but who had not yet mated did extremely well in his experience with tandem psi functioning.

However I don't think the research was done specifically on RV, nor was his work.  So it may or may not apply to the tasker/viewer/monitor situation, I don't know.

I have noticed over time more tendency for viewers in groups with interpersonal relationships to get the same data (even when it's wrong), as one of many examples, and this is part of why I talk about 'validation' being a form of 'informal feedback' that has to be watched carefully.  This is not a big deal on feedback targets but on targets without that, especially the 'government secrets' and 'alien agenda' types of taskings, it can sure cause some lurking suspicions. ;-)  

I believe intent is "exponential, not additional".  In magickal workings, there is a huge difference between 8 people in a ritual and one or even 3 -- I mean huge.  It's like there's some critical mass you hit and WHOMPF, the energy's so fast and powerful you are wondering if you are going to be forced out of body or throw up on yourself before it's your turn to sing or lead LOL.

Psi likely comes from 'every possible' source of info, and it's possible that if one has a real rapport with personX, one is more likely to get info, or get it clearly, from personX, than perhaps from other sources.  Then again, this is assuming there is any such thing as different 'sources' of info at all, and that's not just our linear perception of reality.

Whether this same dynamic 'improves' RV, would have to be seen.  I think it likely does at least somewhat, and having a 'team' for RV that had good relations would be very beneficial to the overall process.  

... On the other hand, I wouldn't want to see a viewer be dependent on it, and as a viewer I sure wouldn't want to be.  That's sort of like learning to ski only on perfect powder areas or skydive only under ideal, easy conditions.  Someday one may have to be able to deal with the real world without the 'gentle padding' of a perfect situation, and I think I'd rather have some rough&ready sort who was 'generally good' at stuff than a fragile flower who seemed much better--but only with the grey room and 9 other steps in place and only people they knew and liked involved, LOL.

The hardest part about having any objective testing of this in the layman's field is that when people work together who have those relationships, they also tend to talk to each other after and about the sessions, which can affect the process, and depending on the situation things aren't always fully double-blind, etc.--there are other factors that tend to be ignored which also may affect results, when things are done outside the carefully controlled parameters in the lab.

I'm interested to hear other peoples' experience with this and thoughts on it -- in any kind of psi work, even, not just RV.

PJ

[waterway]

Thanks PJ,

Criminy, you have me asking more questions than I am getting answers to.  But... I will stay on topic....

I am interested in IF this phenomenon exists, then maybe we can shed some light on WHY, and find out more about the mechanism of RV.  I am not interested in another crutch....

I've been working with my 6th grade daughter who is learning the "Scientific Method" and in our discussion here, I am interested in finding out how these variables relate to each other.... IF indeed close relationships increase RV success.

I think I saw something a few months ago from a researcher in Edinburgh on this topic.... I will look into it.  Does anyone else know what I am talking about?

My model for understanding How this works is that good ol' Web of Indra concept.  But I cannot figure out if I believe that we all share a common web, or if each of us has our own personal web, and we get together only conceptually.... ie you talk about your apple and I talk about my apple and the vast majority of the relationships to those apples are mirrored... but not the same.

I am not sure of much of this, its a work in progress, but I thought I'd float it out here for critiquing and examination.

Again, do RVers find that "closeness" with fellow researchers helps increase RV successes?

[trypper]

>Again, do RVers find that "closeness" with fellow researchers >helps increase RV successes?

IMHO *trust* helps increase any psi success.   One is less hesitant to open up to a trusted companion.  "Closeness" breeds trust.

trypper

[waterway]

Okay then, approaching this from another angle....

If we had targets that were significant to the viewer or analyst, such as important events from their lives... would the RV success rate go up?

While agree that trust does help.... I think other interspersonal factors influence it more.... or at least that has been suggested by some researchers....

People in new relationships, who have only known each other and been dating a few months, scored significantly higher than couples that had been together for decades.  If this is true.... it suggests that some energy... some strengthened INTENT in their fledgling relationship, increases the success of zener card tests.

And yes, I am saying that the significance of the zener card success, is what increases the success rate.  I might even go so far as to say that.... trust is actually stronger in new love than in old, since you are willing to invest MORE trust then.  Maybe I am confusing trust with need... which would explain a lot of my relationships.... ouch.

Correct me folks, I need some understanding here....  

[trypper]

> If we had targets that were significant to the viewer or >analyst, such as important events from their lives... would the >RV success rate go up?

In my humble opinion it would.  Most of my hits had a personal element.

> While agree that trust does help.... I think other interspersonal >factors influence it more.... or at least that has been suggested >by some researchers.... Ê
> Ê
> People in new relationships, who have only known each other >and been dating a few months, scored significantly higher than >couples that had been together for decades. ÊIf this is true.... it >suggests that some energy... some strengthened INTENT in >their fledgling relationship, increases the success of zener card >tests.
Ê
> And yes, I am saying that the significance of the zener card >success, is what increases the success rate. ÊI might even go so >far as to say that.... trust is actually stronger in new love than >in old, since you are willing to invest MORE trust then. ÊMaybe I >am confusing trust with need... which would explain a lot of my >relationships.... ouch.

That doesn't make sense to me at all.

In new relationships, the individuals are focusing strongly on each other in an attempt to *win/find/earn* that trust.  ÊJust like you try a little harder in a brand new job.  That doesn't mean you won't be as or more competent later on.  The cards may say more about relationships than it does about psi.
Ê
trypper

[size=0]Modified by PJ who had a hard time figuring out what was quote vs. comment so tried to 'quote it'.[/size]

[waterway]

Trypper,

When you said:
"That doesn't make sense to me at all." regarding my earlier post where I said:

"And yes, I am saying that the significance of the zener card success, is what increases the success rate.  I might even go so far as to say that.... trust is actually stronger in new love than in old, since you are willing to invest MORE trust then.  Maybe I am confusing trust with need... which would explain a lot of my relationships.... ouch. "


I will try to clarify in case it may shed some light on this discussion.  I think the first sentence was really the only part that mattered there... my later conjecturing on new love and relationships was a vain attempt to be witty....

But as for the point of that paragraph, I think the reason that new loves do better together on zener card tests (if they do... I still can't find that web-article) is because the event of doing well means more to them than failure.  Doing well on the zener card tests means more to a new couple than an old couple because it more strongly strengthens the new relationship.   I think the energy behind the PSI success is the relationship and NOT PSI success.  The fact of success is SIGNIFICANT to the new couple in a way that an older relationship would not be.  

I hope that clarifies some.

[trypper]

I will try to clarify in case it may shed some light on this discussion. ÊI think the first sentence was really the only part that mattered there... my later conjecturing on new love and relationships was a vain attempt to be witty....

Aha!  Got it... witty. :-)

But as for the point of that paragraph, I think the reason that new loves do better together on zener card tests (if they do... I still can't find that web-article) is because the event of doing well means more to them than failure. ÊDoing well on the zener card tests means more to a new couple than an old couple because it more strongly strengthens the new relationship. Ê I think the energy behind the PSI success is the relationship and NOT PSI success. ÊThe fact of success is SIGNIFICANT to the new couple in a way that an older relationship would not be.

I think I understand what you mean.  

trypper
       
[size=0]Modified by PJ, as somehow the entire outer page of the bbs got copied into the box of this message, just removing that... sorry trypper don't mean to 'get in' your posts, just trying to help.[/size]

[waterway]

This is starting to bug me.  I have a memory of a web-article about a researcher in England somewhere doing studies of people in close relationships.  I want to say it is Dr. Paul Stevens.  It was some topical piece, not a scientific journal.  I did find this though, but it isn't what I remember.  It would have been from at least 6 months ago.  

Its from a webpage dedicated to PSI info.  

The research is not yet complete, but Dr Stevens, who conducted the experiments at Edinburgh University's world-renowned parapsychology unit, theorized that they might have found a significant pattern.  He hopes that the experiments will not only demonstrate psychic ability but will show the underlying mechanisms responsible for it.

The study paired people with extremely well developed relationships.  Each pair was split up and designated as a “sender” or “receiver.”  Senders were shown a series of randomly selected video clips and told to “send” the information to the partner who sat in a soundproofed room nearly 100 feet away.  Receivers listened to “white noise” believed to put them into an ultra-receptive state.  They were then asked to say what came into their heads while their body was measured for any changes.


Can anyone else point to similar research?

[PJ]

I believe quite a bit of Ganzfeld research-- the protocol for your description quoted is Ganzfeld with a sender-- is similar to this, though not all use senders.  Look under Honorton, Charles, he did quite a bit of that type of research.

One thing is, the reason outbounders/senders were eventually dropped from research here is because they weren't necessary.  Really good viewers had good data whether someone was 'sending' to them or not.

So maybe this is instance #1,872 where things in the lab and things in the layman's world differ, mostly because the differing caliber of viewer measured in the two different areas results in two different situations or experiences.

PJ