RV Oasis / PJRV Discussion, Yahoo Groups.
Source Location: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pjrv/
Filetype: Archive. Topic: Remote Viewing. Blocked: by topic detail.
Archive Storage: www.firedocs.com/pjrv/ and http://www.dojopsi.info/pjrv/
Archivist: Palyne PJ Gaenir (PJRV, Palyne, Firedocs RV, TKR and the Dojo Psi.)

begin archive

pjrv : Messages : 2483-2530 of 4038


From: "pjgaenir" Date: Sat Mar 8, 2003 12:38 pm Subject: Perception; Quantum Reality; Reusing Sessions pjgaenir > Further thoughts on the essay at largeruniverse.com. > {"What if it wasn't Remote Viewing at all but something else? > Quantum Viewing may be a more appropriate term."} I think everything in our experience is probably 'quantum'. The very creation of reality (and hence experience) likely is. All that differs is whether we recognize that. I'd expect remote viewing to be part of the same fabric as everything else. It's kind of cool to consider it, though, as it opens up many interesting questions. Unfortunately, many of the questions it opens up, have no more answers than quantum theory does, and can hurt your brain trying. ;-) When our minds look for answers, we look for logic, for rational explanation, for something that 'makes sense'. The very structure of our minds as they have developed is based on a seemingly linear, logical, cause-effect reality experience. Getting the mind (and I mean core psychological structures, not just the conscious mind) to even 'accept' that is not the reality, which viewing eventually demands, is difficult enough. I am not sure the 'logical mind' itself is an appropriate tool for genuinely understanding or 'figuring out' many of the questions of the quantum nature of existence. There is a certain aspect of soul or consciousness, whatever one may call it, that seems required to comprehend things that do not obey logic. I've had this, as I'm sure everyone has at some time, in suddenly understanding ineffable things, such as nothingness, or the equality of polarities (Binah in the QBL field), or other metaphysical constants. It is like an "added dimension of mind", that makes such comprehension possible. Whatever the case, such realizations or experiences do not translate well into verbal or written communication, which require logical constructs and a linear explanation. ---- {"Emergent behavior has also been noted in the study of consciousness, with some researchers postulating that consciousness itself is an emergent behavior stemming from human social interaction."} Back in April 95 (I remember, as I read it two days before I got married ;-) -- do you suppose I lack romance, LOL!) I read an interesting book related to this called 'The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind', by Julian Jaynes. If celebrally inclined, folks might like the book. I don't agree with the various theories Jaynes is putting forth necessarily, and I think there are some ... perhaps metaphysical issues that make some of the questions just... not the right ones to be asking... but I respect his inquiry and find it an interesting subject. This is one of the more layman-readable books on the topic that I know of, for those interested. ---- {"What if a session can be many things at once, depending on how you look at the data, who's doing the tasking, what their intention is .... "} Well, this almost could apply, if I get into armchair philosophy I guess, to any source of information. Even the most basic information such as a physical event or object. The same event shared by many people will be described in many ways because they are different, and perception is at least half the equation. Physics suggests that all mass is simply vibrating energy trapped in one place. So, the large picture on my living room wall is just energy. It is the combination of that energy and *my perception of it* that results in a seemingly third thing, "the picture on the wall". After all, a fly sees it differently; my cat sees it differently -- it is MY perception that makes it whatever it "obviously is" to me. To a fly and to a cat, it "obviously is" something different. The energy didn't change -- only the "tool of perception": the biological filters and the psychological filters/interpretive constructs. (Btw I talked about this some in "Bewilderness" which is linked from Firedocs, as it related to experiences in that case study.) So this would suggest that there really is no 'objective' reality, since subjective, individual perception is half the equation (at least) for every object, event, etc. IN reality. There would only be a "consensus" reality: all humans, influenced initial by parents, taught to perceive certain energy in certain ways, taught to ignore all kinds of things, etc. I get a quite different experience from the garden than my child does, even though the "physical and linear reality of it" is perceived by us both in a similar way, as my perceptive models are handed down to her. Any remote viewing session is surely subject to the same effect, if everything else in reality is. The patches of wild in my yard that I find beautiful, in 1001 shades of green, my cat finds tasty and delightful to sit in when the sun is 'dappled' through it, my landscapers find annoying as poison ivy's usually growing in it and it's a bitch to mow around or weed through without killing the stuff they know I like, and my father finds almost offensive because to him, if a human did not specifically plant it there, it's a WEED! My friend visited and saw half a dozen 'weeds' that had herbal medicinal value. The same physical objects, perceived by humans who would describe it - - in "physical" terms -- the same way, still are interpreted and even utilized or responded to in very different ways. What changes is our need and our perception. If I need to interpret session data (not "analyze" -- RV analysis is fully blind to the tasking and target -- interpretation is what most call analysis, that is, looking at a session, with the tasking known, and deciding how that session or session(s) best fit into the context of creating a possible answer), how that's done is obviously going to depend on my perspective -- my need and my reason for inquiry. If I have target 1 -- assigned to the session -- my 'need' for the data in SessionX is one thing. If I have target 14 -- RE-assigned to the session, unknown to the viewer or not -- my 'need' for the data in SessionX is another thing. How well it applies to either -- or to 9 other retaskings -- might depend on lots of factors. On commonalities in the targets. On the viewer and their degree of deliberate-independence from the intent of others. On whether the tasker is the same in both cases. Etc. Like my yard -- one looks for edibles, one for flowers or color, one for weeds, one for herbal medicines. The same patch of land-plants may apply very well to all of them. There is no contradiction. Like a kaleidascope (my usual allegory for reality/perception), the same pieces can be perceived differently. Did my father remote influence the weeds into his existence? Maybe. If we create our reality experiences, I guess so. But on a day-to- day basis, I would not blame the weeds on the critic who finds them. ;-) I would merely feel that every person has the ability to take what they want from any information. -- In RV, we're generally dealing with words and shapes. A word can mean many things. So can a shape actually, as sketches can represent form, motion, etc. Take some seemingly obvious word or phrase: "Curving." or: "projecting upward." Those seem fairly specific (not labeling). But what if I ask you, about the meaning of that word or phrase: "In shape, in motion, in function or process?" A cactus, a rocket, a fountain, a trampoline, all could fit the "projecting upward" data point if one is 'interpreting' a session. This is one example, but for those interested in this topic, you can probably do this kind of breakdown with much of the data from any given session by yourself or others. Let us say that the target given the viewer for feedback was a rocket, but the session was retasked (unknown to the viewer) three times for the other items as target focus. Is it possible that if the viewer emphasized "projecting upward" instead of any other of many possibilities (and that exact wording no less), it was because of the re-taskings? Might it be, that had the cactus tasking instead been an olympic ski jump event, or a fire truck's extended ladder bucket, that "motion" would have been more emphasized by the viewer instead? Or, if only the trampoline was re-tasked, that the joint concept of something projecting upward from a flat bottom would be emphasized? -- RV Sessions are works of art. They are an original, unique creation. The art itself may be a form of consciousness. It may participate jointly in its creation. It may mold itself to be, as it wishes, based on the influences of those who experience it, and by doing so affect its own formation. Does a baby in the womb choose its DNA based in part on the experiences it has when 14 that drove it to become a murderer at 23? Or the experiences it had for years when young that drove it to become a scientist? Might the experience of the future drive the creation of the present? Seth would say it does and I seldom find reason to disagree with him so far. Every time someone thinks to themselves that a certain life experience wasn't fun but in the end things worked out and led them somewhere important, so perhaps they were meant to go that way, they are in that boat of thinking that based on a future experience, they may have chosen the past experience. And, they may have affected their own character formation, in that past, based on what they needed to be for that future. Even though the future might only have been brought about because of that past. It is a catch-22 of the kind which, like I mentioned at the beginning, can hurt your brain if you try to make it logical. It isn't logical. It is quantum, as Pru used the term in her essay. If every experience of our life is 'quantum', well, RV - even just interpreting someone's session - is an experience too. At least, these are my thoughts for the moment. PJ Reply | Forward


From: "David Bender" Date: Sat Mar 8, 2003 2:02 pm Subject: RE: Perception; Quantum Reality; Reusing Sessions triplets...t.net Hi folks, Getting up to speed with the current discussion on this RV list is making for fascinating reading. Though I'm a relative "newbie" in these parts, I hope to I learn from you all. Thanks to PJ and "Firedocs," I've read a great deal on the subject, and her thoughtful replies to queries encouraged me to explore the issues more fully. I've had several "close swipes" with RV over the years, and hope to deepen the connection. By the way, as a journalist and radio correspondent here in Israel, I'd be more than curious to hear any insights from sessions about coming regional events, for obvious reasons. No politics, mind you, just RV experiences! Also, as per below, here are three recent links with what interesting material on the subject of quantum mechanics and consciousness: http://www.kurzweilai.net/meme/frame.html?main=/articles/art0183.html http://www.consciousness.arizona.edu/quantum-mind2/ http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=0007E95C-9597-1DC9-AF71809EC5 88EEDF &catID=2 Best regards, Dave Bender * Radio correspondent * Translation services * Website editing & production 10/A Gat Street Kiryat Moshe Jerusalem, Israel 96103 Cellphone: 972 50 797 234 Tel/fax: 972 2 651 1214 Email: triplets...t.net Reply | Forward


From: "Elizabeth Hambrook" Date: Sun Mar 9, 2003 4:32 am Subject: Re: Perception; Quantum Reality; Reusing Sessions ozblueriver Pru:> {"What if it wasn't Remote Viewing at all but something else? > Quantum Viewing may be a more appropriate term."} In reply to your post about this PJ, I'd like to add the thought that she might mean that RV opens us to all levels or dimentions of existence. We think we're RVing just on one level, but think of the possibilities of someone else tasking us to find out info about something in another dimention while we are busy concentrating on the original task. Cheers Liz ---------------------------- Moderator's note: Well sheesh, maybe WE, in other lives or parallel realities or 1001 aspects of self are using every RV session as a multi-level communication. You how dreams can actually mean 20 different things just depending on what level of them you wish to interpret. Well why not RV? PJ

// end archive

Top of Page