ARV Tips and Hints

RV Protocol

GO VIEW! @TKR's dojo

Project Home Page

RV webForum (here!)

Email: @Yahoo|@Google

Help make it possible for everyone!

TKR is Funded by:
PJ of Dojo Psi

Simple Session

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

P.I.A.

Greg K's ARV Trials

RV Roast (alt)

RV Library

[Entmu]

^^^Good post. I just read his article.
Kinda like what I put here: but minus the emotions.

Some hints:

I have increase accuracy by taking a deep and detailed look at the images on feedback day, and really working on putting them into long-term memory.

I liken this to trying to remember an image ten years later as similar to seeing it happen ten days before. Burn the image into your mind. Draw the exact shape and outline of it exactly in your mind. Make it vivid as possible. "Metaphorize it." A tidal wave is a giant blue elephant stomping around devastating a city. A fire burns your hand. It has hair. Firey hair.

http://www.weatherstock.com/WV4.jpg

http://www.rubyriver.com/Sizzler/fire.jpg

Any little idea that helps, even if you think it is silly, please post up.

[bill161]

Hi All,

Been enjoying the posts by everyone.

Gene, I strongly agree with the idea of short sessions. Others I worked with have hinted at this same thing. I think Greg K said so directly. After all it's just a picture. If you view it too long mental curiosity may take you over to the wrong photo. Besides one has probably exhausted the correct one.

Anyway thought I'd chime in something since, I was enjoying other peoples posts. Hate to free load.

Best Regards,
Bill

[Steppe]

I'm trying various ARV schemes.
For: Yes No Maybe style outcmes
Windows Session 9178
3: Maybe was outcome
As picture 3. was the hardest picture match.

[tania]

 Im wondering after reading this whether my expectations of things and how this works is like throu the roof?,  (I dont know much about RV myself only really from my own practices and experiments other than two different lessons on it).  How often do good RVers get the actual targets and get correct results???  I was shocked when i read that if one hit  9 out of 10 correctly that that would be considered by those here as a quite amazing kind of thing.  I kind of thought that good rvers would get right results all of the time (and so that is what ive been trying to aim for).    Thou ive never tried to RV the stock markets (I dont even understand anything about those) i once had an interesting experience in a casino.  I was playing the wheel of forture (the roulette wheel which has all different numbers about it and one places a bet on what number will come up next).  It was the first time i'd ever been to a casino (Ive only been two or three times in my whole life as I dont believe in gambling),  anyway I placed a small bet on a number and won it.. placed another small bet and won it too.. By about my 6 bet I noticed some there actually copying my bets, I found this rather funny.  By the time it got to my about 14 or 15 correct bet straight.. well i'd drawn a huge crowd lol, from the table to the wall behind and the whole walkway..well the walkway was completely blocked by the crowd i'd drawn.  By that time nearly everybody there was betting on the exactly the same number I'd bet on.. they were all waiting (other than a few people there).. to place their bets onto exactly wherever I placed mine so leaving the rest of the wheel nearly completely empty  (all the attention kind of made me feel like royality LOL).  So many bets were being placed on that place after my bet that all the tokens being placed there wasnt fitting easily and the piles were falling due to everyone who get in enough to even putting a bet in, putting bets onto the same space lol.  After about my 16-19 small bet (I wasnt counting but the crowd was by that time with the silence between the bets getting more and more intense and like umm hard to explain..like holding ones breath)  (I just kept all my winnings each time and only bet the same amount each time).. I got bored with it all as the novelity had worn off so just left.  (I cant remember if i lost my very last small bet on that last spin before I left or not.. it didnt really matter to me.. it all was just an interesting experience.. and I walked into the casino with only a couple of dollars and walked out with a lot of money).  Ive never played that wheel since..as I said i dont believe in gambling and have no interest in it.. (I'd only done it for a novelity as i hadnt played that game before).  I just somehow just KNEW what number would come up next....

[Don_Williams]

Tania,
you wrote:
"How often do good RVers get the actual targets and get correct results  I was shocked when i read that if one hit  9 out of 10 correctly that that would be considered by those here as a quite amazing kind of thing.  I kind of thought that good rvers would get right results all of the time (and so that is what ive been trying to aim for). "

No, lol.  If we got right results all the time, we'd rule the world!  The best that's been demonstrated in laboratories, under scientific controls that preclude cheating, for any decent length of time is about 67% accuracy.  There ARE times when someone will do much better for short periods but without repeat viewing, over and over again with an error-correcting protocol, 65-67% is about the best that can be expected.  

That said, I know a lot of viewers, myself included, do better than that on operational (real world) targets.  maybe it's cause you know someone really needs the answers you can provide, I don't know.  But RVing picture targets, etc. doesn't tend to make for that kind of accuracy.

A side note here - the single best way I know of to increase you ARV results is to stop using pictures for your target possibilities.  Use local, outbound sites instead.  It's a lot more difficult, since you have to travel to the site for feedback, but your accuracy will increase substantially.
Don

[PJ]

Howdy Don (now you see, you distracted me from my break to eat some quick breakfast, to actually type instead!),

That said, I know a lot of viewers, myself included, do better than that on operational (real world) targets.  maybe it's cause you know someone really needs the answers you can provide, I don't know.  But RVing picture targets, etc. doesn't tend to make for that kind of accuracy. A side note here - the single best way I know of to increase you ARV results is to stop using pictures for your target possibilities.  Use local, outbound sites instead.  It's a lot more difficult, since you have to travel to the site for feedback, but your accuracy will increase substantially. Don

I agree. The 'scope' of a target 'in the world' is uncountable orders of magnitude larger than the 'scope' of a target as measured by a visual-only, two-dimensional photograph. In terms of things to say that would be correct, the 'target' in a live case is vastly bigger.

It's also considerably more fuzzy on the trivia; unlike a pic where  if a data isn't shown or directly implied, it's considered wrong, in apps, all that becomes trivia or 'possibly right', while the 'overall situation' is more the target. On ops type targets people tend to dismiss all data in a session that isn't assumed correct (unless it is literally contradictory to the rest and sometimes even then), since "it could be" right and just not have feedback; whereas with photo-feedback, each thing not in that momentary-capture count 'against' the overall session accuracy.

Lastly of course, the feedback experience is a strong part of what psi seems to access, so the more multi-sensory and impactive it is, often the better the session itself is (sometimes, the more 'internally kinesthetic' it seems to the viewer).

Targets where the task is the feedback and the feedback is an in-person experience are definitely best. (I finally got someone to start collecting local tasks for me by the way, about flippin time!! I knew he'd be good for something. )

PJ

[larrywojo]

Hi Don_Williams,

                    I'm very interested in your idea. Could you walk me through your procedure for setting up your targets and getting the feedback?

Thanks a million,
larrywojo

[tania]

  Thanks Don for explaining that to me   .  I think I will after reading what you said, as Im still building my confidence and just hate to get anything wrong as Im a perfectionist lol.. I think I'll stick with blind targets using only numbers and not go and try to use photos.  (I havent tried to RV from a photo yet but have great success doing it blind using only numbers).

[Joe_Black]

I always wandered who is the middle man in ARV, is the matrix itself or actually a person involved.

For instance most ARV targets are REALLY different for obvious reasons and from the session data the outcome is easily chosen. But for instance a even that is predicatable to lets say 85% accuracy a week in advance. But ARV after repetition or using many viewers only gets 60% accuracy if that. The is a missing 10% assuming we take 5% of for natural RV total failure which happens sometimes. Why is it down to the viewer going to the wrong target subconsiously on purpose? Does the viewer subconsiously want to lose? Or down to the taskers subconsious? Also instead of using the classic ARV protocal would using another person to place different objects in a defined place at a defined time after the target outcome be more accurate?

Another thing would having seperate viewers view for instance, the other undesired option in a 2 choice ARV setup increase accuracy?

[Entmu]

The medium you are looking for is the mind.

In the mind, the past, present, future breathe as one.

Time is an illusion.

It is the question that drives us Neo.

Username:
Password: