The difference between Pellerano and mode PSEUDO_REG.

Check the connection between human consciousness and physical world
Post Reply

Есть ли различия в ощущениях при работе с псилероном или с функцией PSEUDO_REG?

ДА! Сравнивал различия есть.
2
67%
Незнаю, не сравнивал.
1
33%
Сравнивал, различий не ощутил.
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 3

Сержио1
Posts:23
Joined:Sat Mar 20, 2010 10:40
Been thanked: 1 time
The difference between Pellerano and mode PSEUDO_REG.

Post by Сержио1 » Sun Mar 21, 2010 19:43

I have created one topic in psyleron. Maybe someone posited this is plagiarism but I decided to open another topic, because it is relevant not only for owners of the device, but for those who thinks to buy it. The fact that the computer, unlike psyleron may not generate the coincidence of the description it is clear, for accident purpose of the initial analog signal. What are the differences in the sensations or the results of psyleron and PSEUDO_REG (software substitutes in the games coming from psyleron)?
Let's share the experience. The differences and analogies of the court write in this topic. And so there is someone to share?

Дмитрий__
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:

Post by Дмитрий__ » Tue Mar 23, 2010 0:19

PEAR articles in their writing that they are failed to achieve a reliable level (95%) of the psychokinesis experiments with a software pseudorandom generator (PSEUDO_REG), but in the case of EXTERNAL pseudo-random generator, the result was.
I spent weeks on the night included the FieldREG data with pseudorandom generator but a full analysis for cumulative experiments have not yet done (set it is necessary to analyze external tools. Like to summarize the experiments using internal analysis tools FieldREG - I don't know). According to preliminary data PSEUDO_REG is a good algorithm, the probability distribution it gives almost Gaussian with small deviations at the edges of the range. Later I'll write more about that.

Сержио1
Posts:23
Joined:Sat Mar 20, 2010 10:40
Been thanked: 1 time

Post by Сержио1 » Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:02

Thank you for the interesting information, but the difference in their feelings when working with one and other you feel? For me it's interesting because my experience with psilon was short (few days). But I can say that I will be able to distinguish their feelings what works psil or pseudo-prog. And was able to see this I so the evening worked for some time with Silom, and then for a moment I tried pseudo, then turned off the computer and psil and went to sleep. In the morning not remembering what is the pseudo mode, I connected psil and started to work. After many pochuvstvoval that chegoto lacking, the result
not the same, after some time the result went but still the feeling that something. Then I realized that the feeling rather that I guess than the model. And then I realized that working with pseudo climbed into the settings for sure! Standing pseudo! This.

Дмитрий__
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:

Post by Дмитрий__ » Wed Mar 24, 2010 12:10

thanks for the interesting information, but the difference in their feelings when working with one and other you feel?
I personally did some experiments of PEAR CLASSIC as an external module and PSEUDO_REG. In the case of a pseudo-random generator is reliable psychokinesis was not recorded even once, unlike the exterior, where such experiments were. However, this does not prove anything: when I was running PSEUDO_REG into the night, where there were areas of anomalous behavior, and quite lengthy. Therefore, it is necessary to collect a database for the findings, or to trust the results PEAR 8)
IMHO, it is better to avoid talking about experiences in working with physical devices is the way to achieve objectivity. Otherwise, it is easy to slip into fantasies unrelated to reality that unfortunately, sometimes there is... Better graphics the numbers there, and other midget :) Another thing is that not all this language is suitable.

Дмитрий__
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:

Post by Дмитрий__ » Wed Mar 24, 2010 12:11

Oh, by the way, most of the data that I exported, destroyed the evil virus out there that will have to retype.

Михаил_
Разработчик
Posts:10765
Joined:Fri Nov 03, 2006 4:29
Been thanked: 906 times

Post by Михаил_ » Mon Mar 29, 2010 5:34

the schedule does not better.
the graph shows the long-term deviation and the subconscious this mode of exposure to nafig not needed.
We are for the first couple of months of use of the SMS service synctxt got the accuracy (timeliness) of receipt of SMS about 80-90%%. However it is not at all out - of operator the result varies GREATLY.
In the case linktxt is always unconsciously sending, but depend on the operator anyway.
Coincidences of this kind do not happen. All the messages have been personalized creepy (mostly people's names), very often (and most often) came to call these people, or after talking with them (i.e. I've thought or still think). Friends, as well.
How to make pseudotag is necessary to find out more. If he hardware the random number generator, in the sense reset periodically implemented in hardware, the impact of the external factors is possible (as the effect of consciousness by the way)but significantly more complex.
Ie if pseudotag constantly reset when you reset inicializirati from an external random factor (for example make the temperature of the Prots, or the value of the timer and so on), the reset time can shift the probability, and it depends on a lot of other probabilistic factors that consciousness definitely has an impact.

кразимен
Posts:2
Joined:Sun Jan 16, 2011 0:35

Post by кразимен » Sun Jan 16, 2011 2:21

As far as my memory serves me at PEAR conducted a comparative study of the impact of operators on REG and pseudo-REG. And this is in their book "Margins of Reality".
The obtained data prove statistically that the impact on pseudogenization is also the place to be, but not as pronounced as on the physical. They explain this vague, alleged effect PC sold not only on the physical components of the generator but also at the system information level.
In my opinion, the success of the impact sensor is determined by two factors:
1. Effective interaction of consciousness with the physical process in the selected direction (clean PC)
2. Selection of the optimal exposure time (precognitive component).

I remember a fragment from the film "Indigo", when the teenager from Indigo, in the casino walks past gaming machines and says to his friends - this machine is not yet ready for results winning numbers, will ripen in a day or so, but this is ready and you need to play it immediately. Play and frustrate the cashier.

Post Reply