Lottery Experiment

Paracelsus

New Member
Hello everyone.

Here is a new experiment I'm starting, targeting the UK main lottery, with an astrological twist, and ARV as an optional method.

http://www.procyonrising.webspace.virginmedia.com/

The experiment is free to join, and I will share a proportion of my winnings with successful participants, so there is no excuse for not having a go!
 

Omega

Euphoria = Hitting the Target !! : )
Or perhaps if all information was shared with those involved, then each could have their own share automatically ..if it comes up ! That would make more....."trusting sense throughout"

Rick
 

Red_Star

New Member
Paracelsus said:
Hello everyone.

Here is a new experiment I'm starting, targeting the UK main lottery, with an astrological twist, and ARV as an optional method.

http://www.procyonrising.webspace.virginmedia.com/

The experiment is free to join, and I will share a proportion of my winnings with successful participants, so there is no excuse for not having a go!

That's a very interesting project. Makes me wonder why they switched from live broadcast of the actual draw to just electronic in my country, I guess if it's electronic and no longer live televised draw, they can control whatever numbers they want to show up on the draw.
 

Paracelsus

New Member
PsiSpy said:
Or perhaps if all information was shared with those involved, then each could have their own share automatically ..if it comes up ! That would make more....."trusting sense throughout"

Rick

I will be sharing the top predeictions with others, so everyone in the UK will be able to buy thier own lottery tickets based on the group efforts.
 

PJ

Administrator
Staff member
I wish you well in your endeavor.


I notice this is an "ESP" experiment based on your title, which means it is not by nature bound to the protocol/definition of RV (Remote Viewing). Still, the reason RV got popular is because its definition and protocol allowed a higher success rate than ESP done in other formats, so perhaps it's worth mentioning some of that. Also you refer to ARV which _is_ specific to RV.


If you are struggling to visualise any numbers, you might like to try associative remote viewing (ARV) instead.
Remote Viewing (vs. ESP which describes anything) of any type including ARV is "free response" by its primary nature. If you are limiting selection in some way to known options, it is not remote viewing, it is card choosing (or, in some respects, concept dowsing). (Well in your case, it is literally card choosing, humorously.) The success % of non-free-response psi work is vastly lower (and is not RV), so you might find better success with a free-response format.


The basic idea is to associate a particular image with each lottery number, and then to try to visualise before the draw which images you will view after the draw.
Image. Singular. There is just one target for one session, right. (Trivia: visualization is one sense of many. Works for visual people. Less so for others.)


For this project we will be using Tarot cards from the Rider-Waite deck as our target images, as follows:

1 - 20: the first 20 cards from the MAJOR ARCANA
21 - 29: the suit of CUPS
30: The WORLD
31 - 39: the suit of SWORDS
40: The FOOL
41 - 49: the suit of PENTACLES

After the draw we will study the cards represented by the drawn lottery numbers. But can you see now which cards you will study later?
1. This is not remote viewing by definition, since it is not free response. It fits within an ESP experiment but not within what would properly be called RV or ARV, fwiw.

2. This is not performed within an appropriate RV protocol even for ARV, because the viewer is informed to the 'target' in advance. "Visualizing and guessing which of some known options you'll see later" is not remote viewing at all. Do more in-protocol RV and you should naturally begin to understand the difference.

3. This violates a basic ARV protocol: the viewer should in the end get feedback only on the target. Not the unmanifest potentials. By spec'ing the list up front, that's impossible.

4. You are missing the primary point of associative remote viewing. There are two primary reasons to use ARV:

a) to assign a good quality target for free response psi to something which is a lousy target because it is abstract or whatever.

So for example, numbers are classic 'abstract' targets. Even if the viewer does accurate describe them, how that comes across to an individual may be a unique thing, and the judge is unlikely to understand and translate that well. ARV lets you make targets into decent targets known to be acquired by decent viewers a decent % of the time -- like a physical location, event or thing for example. It's much more likely a judge will understand even symbolic data for 'mountain' vs. for '17'.

In your example, all your targets are pretty much abstracts, as tarot cards; 'representation' targets. Remote Viewing can make anything a target, but if you want to have success in evaluating the viewers' sessions (the worst part of ARV by far), the closer to traditional, ideal targets as possible the better. Nouns: person, places, things. And to a lesser degree events.

b) to assign a diverse set of options which are very different from one another to something which is otherwise very similar.

So for example, you could use ordinary viewing for sports games such as baseball. But no matter which team wins, both are inherently part of the context of the target, and viewers are likely to get elements of both in the data which is very confusing to try and evaluate. So ARV can be used to make the 'potentials' -- the target which will be shown to the viewer as feedback for their session -- far more diverse, as well as more gestalt-level, e.g. a river vs. a mountain vs. a person. All you need is to be able to tell them apart in session data.

In your example, all your targets are tarot cards. By its nature this is like making all the targets 'nearly' the same thing.

This is SO much like making the targets the same thing, I am tempted to think you haven't done any real viewing. It doesn't take very much experience evaluating sessions let alone creating them, to realize the fundamentals noted in this post. You would benefit from some real world experience so I encourage you to try it. It might make your experiments with others all the better.


If you merely wished to suggest that people could 'associate' one thing with another thing, I'd leave the ARV/Associative Remote Viewing terminology out of it. Card-guessing association is not associative remote viewing.


What you are really doing here is attempting to "do the viewing within the peak period of Local Sidereal Time, as analyzed by Spottiswoode et al." Some viewers do use this although more back in the day when this was first found.

The dominant association with astrology (that during this LST a certain star in Libra is present) is a grafting-on from others, not that this makes it any less interesting of course. Using astrology as the focus reminds me of the studies of the MARS effect in sports.

I actually thought the Local Sidereal Time of an individual viewer (based on longitude) coincided with having the constellation Virgo directly overhead (and the Center of the Galaxy, Sirius A, behind that), but this is not something I ever really paid attention to in astrological terms so I don't really know. I suppose no matter what "theory" related to LST is used for the dominant focus, it's all the same really, we could just as arbitrarily choose a star or constellation with a certain degree of angle to the viewer as well as what was overhead.


All experimentation is good.

RV experimentation that fits within the definition of RV, and within the protocol of RV, is cooler to me.

Even ESP experiments are cool though. Please keep us updated on your success.


Best,
PJ
 

Paracelsus

New Member
Thanks for your constructive comments, PJ.

Clearly I must apologise to RV purists for such cavalier misuse of your terminology. As you can see, I have no experience of remote viewing. You found me out!

So, to clarify, I need to pick 49 diverse targets (mountain, person, etc) to represent the 49 lottery numbers. I ask participants to describe the targets (there are six lottery numbers, seven if you include the bonus ball). After the draw, I show them the targets representing the drawn numbers. Is that right?

Questions:

1.
 

Paracelsus

New Member
Oops, hadn't finished.

My questions are:

1. Can I use the same 49 targets for each draw, or do I have to pick a different selection.

2. What if I keep the same targets but shuffle them, so they represent different numbers?
 

Paracelsus

New Member
To reply to the astrology side, which is more my field, it's actually more complicated than that.

I'm advising participants to use the Spottiswoode LST where possible, but it's not a formal part of this experiment. (One theory is that at this time our own Galactic Centre is rising, so there are less stars overhead, and possibly less geomagnetic disturbance.)

The main focus of my experiment is using astrology to locate the times when participants are most likely to succeed. The premise is that everyone has lucky periods, when the planets' current positions are in harmony with their positions at birth. By identifying these 'lucky peaks' for each participant, and by using the numbers chosen by these people, I'm hoping I can improve on random expectation.

As a further twist, astrologers believe that all ventures, corporations, etc have their own horoscopes, so the Project itself will have lucky peaks when it does well, and other times when we do badly. By buying extra tickets during our lucky peaks, and curtailing our purchases at other times, we could, in theory, get some extra leverage.

This is backed up by comments made by Mick O'Neill, who DID base his lottery experiment on the Spottiswoode times:

"Another aspect of the results so far, with possible astrological ramifications, is that contributors seem to have occasional dramatic winning streaks. One got four winning numbers three times in just 13 attempts, the odds of such a good run, are 3 million to one.

Similarly, the group, which averages about 80 people twice a week, tends to go through phases when we do extremely well for a few weeks. The hope is that one of these phases will be so good that we actually win the jackpot."

http://www.astrologicalassociation.com/transit/sep2004/libralottery.htm
 

NSA

New Member
Paracelsus,

Remote Viewing does not involve luck whatsoever.
I would take the advice given and learn the basics first. Viewers
need to know project managers at least know the basics of RV before
they commit themselves. I would suggest a trial ARV project involving
Just yourself keeping yourself blind to to your targets and log your performance
in a database for you to later solve the astrological aspect you are interested
in. You will learn more this way.

NSA
 

PJ

Administrator
Staff member
Well, my comments are only for clarity related to RV; how you do your own project's your own thing of course.

49 potential targets? No. Or rather: try it. I think you'll find that consistently separating 3 targets is hard enough, never mind 49. ;-)

The astrology element is interesting. I'm all for experimentation. ;D

PJ
 

Mulva

New Member
Picking out 6 of 49 pictures, you are better off randomly guessing 6 numbers to play.

That is not a good construction.

Mulva
 
Top