PSYLERON
- Андрей Кабанков
- Автор сайта
- Posts:3875
- Joined:Fri Mar 31, 2006 8:19
- Location:Москва
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 182 times
- Contact:
Last edited by Андрей Кабанков on Thu Jan 14, 2010 21:50, edited 1 time in total.
- к-13
- Posts:2325
- Joined:Thu Aug 06, 2009 23:19
- Location:Север Кубани
- Has thanked: 31 times
- Been thanked: 129 times
- Contact:
According to the website of the manufacturer (http://www.psyleron.com/reg1.aspx) it will be decent(especially for models with anodized aluminum housing). But the device deserves attention. By the way, in network diagrams such devices http://www.contradeum.narod.ru/page_5.html
- Шалтай Балтай
- Разработчик
- Posts:3392
- Joined:Tue Sep 01, 2009 12:22
- Location:Москва
- Has thanked: 125 times
- Been thanked: 263 times
- Contact:
In the software of the device has the ability to work on an internal pseudorandom generator, with no external GSS. Moreover, you can connect to the computer and multiple external GSS, comparing their work with each other and with pseudorandom generator. Very interesting mental game in the set. I'll try to describe later specific areas of their application. Although briefly about them is already on the website.but simply to write a program that will RNG?
Doesn't work or what?
- Шалтай Балтай
- Разработчик
- Posts:3392
- Joined:Tue Sep 01, 2009 12:22
- Location:Москва
- Has thanked: 125 times
- Been thanked: 263 times
- Contact:
Makes sense that the generator was a very high frequency, then we would have real-time spectral image to build and interactively react to it.
To evaluate (analizirovat) pokazemy RNG else except the spectral, is not possible.
Pseudo-random generator in these experiments does not make sense. He has a range of deterministic and from any external influences depends. To compare them is meaningless - you can draw the "ideal" range for absolutely perfect RNG even in paintbrush. It will be the direct.
To evaluate (analizirovat) pokazemy RNG else except the spectral, is not possible.
Pseudo-random generator in these experiments does not make sense. He has a range of deterministic and from any external influences depends. To compare them is meaningless - you can draw the "ideal" range for absolutely perfect RNG even in paintbrush. It will be the direct.
- Шалтай Балтай
- Разработчик
- Posts:3392
- Joined:Tue Sep 01, 2009 12:22
- Location:Москва
- Has thanked: 125 times
- Been thanked: 263 times
- Contact:
If there are no dependent external influencesВолутар wrote:
Pseudo-random generator in these experiments does not make sense. He has a range of deterministic and from any external influences depends. To compare them is meaningless - you can draw the "ideal" range for absolutely perfect RNG even in paintbrush. It will be the direct.
so
YOU CAN'T affect the "outside world"
The task is in fact such or not?
Or is the "external world" to which you can influence ("hardware" noises, which are able somehow to respond to external "mental" effects), and there is an "external world" which we cannot influence
neuvyazochka here
it is to the contrary, these same "hardware" noises, which are able somehow to respond to external "mental" effect - in ANY CASE, you cannot use
Humpty Baltay, or you have misread, or just misunderstood.
Clarify:
Hardware generators of random noise based on physical effects, which depend on the stochastic processes occurring in our LOCAL physical reality, and therefore presumably subject to influence by consciousness (not by tampering with the device or other EM generators).
Software, software, generators of pseudo-Random noise do not depend on reality in any way. It's just a series of numbers, like Fibonacci numbers, taken only by some module. They don't change anything. The only thing they can influence is not a random software glitch, or a random hardwarei a failure in the CPU (but in this case it will be actually "Hardway" way, but it's corny viable).
Clarify:
Hardware generators of random noise based on physical effects, which depend on the stochastic processes occurring in our LOCAL physical reality, and therefore presumably subject to influence by consciousness (not by tampering with the device or other EM generators).
Software, software, generators of pseudo-Random noise do not depend on reality in any way. It's just a series of numbers, like Fibonacci numbers, taken only by some module. They don't change anything. The only thing they can influence is not a random software glitch, or a random hardwarei a failure in the CPU (but in this case it will be actually "Hardway" way, but it's corny viable).
- Шалтай Балтай
- Разработчик
- Posts:3392
- Joined:Tue Sep 01, 2009 12:22
- Location:Москва
- Has thanked: 125 times
- Been thanked: 263 times
- Contact:
- Шалтай Балтай
- Разработчик
- Posts:3392
- Joined:Tue Sep 01, 2009 12:22
- Location:Москва
- Has thanked: 125 times
- Been thanked: 263 times
- Contact:
Performed the experience
Two medium (I think film) zapisyvali accidental clicks (in the left then in right ear )
the number of clicks to the left = number of clicks in the right
Then one of the carriers gave "psychic" and asked to "make" the number Sachkov in the left - more.
He brought the tape, listened to it, and really proved that kolichestvo clicks in the left - more.
then I began to listen to the original.
That turned out?
kolichestvo clicks in the left - more
what is the matter? I don't know
but if someone says something is impossible he is CERTAINLY right!
Two medium (I think film) zapisyvali accidental clicks (in the left then in right ear )
the number of clicks to the left = number of clicks in the right
Then one of the carriers gave "psychic" and asked to "make" the number Sachkov in the left - more.
He brought the tape, listened to it, and really proved that kolichestvo clicks in the left - more.
then I began to listen to the original.
That turned out?
kolichestvo clicks in the left - more
what is the matter? I don't know
but if someone says something is impossible he is CERTAINLY right!
- Шалтай Балтай
- Разработчик
- Posts:3392
- Joined:Tue Sep 01, 2009 12:22
- Location:Москва
- Has thanked: 125 times
- Been thanked: 263 times
- Contact:
-
- Разработчик
- Posts:299
- Joined:Wed Dec 23, 2009 13:49
- Location:Институт высшей нервной деятельности и нейрофизиологии РАН
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 27 times
- Contact:
Yes.have You tested Psyleron?
Depends on the person. Some people get it immediately.how long will it take to get results when manipulating objects on the screen?
There are more interesting unexplained effect. The curve on the screen, the operator can "steal" either up or down. So, up somehow it turns out much better.
-
- Разработчик
- Posts:299
- Joined:Wed Dec 23, 2009 13:49
- Location:Институт высшей нервной деятельности и нейрофизиологии РАН
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 27 times
- Contact:
Here is an example. Recently conducted an experiment on group effects in the same esoteric group. The device is almost off the scale (see picture). This is when the direction of the impact was "up".There are more interesting unexplained effect. The curve on the screen, the operator can "steal" either up or down. So, up somehow it turns out much better.
Experiment down, spent some time, looked much more mediocre.
explanation: smooth lines above and below the horizontal axis of the graph represent the thresholds of 95% statistical confidence. When the curve data out beyond them, it says very small (in this case, I think a fraction of a percent) probability of the randomness of the result.
These data (that "top" is better) is not the result of global generalizations I have only one experience: the developers of the instrument was carried out many thousands of experiments confirming this effect. Here is the famous chart that combines the results of all experiments. The middle curve is when the operators tried to keep the curve about a horizontal axis (most likely value).