Method to verify if OBE are real or imaginary experiences

[qbeac]

Hello everybody:

Has anybody ever wondered whether Astral Traveling (or OBE, Out of Body Experiences) are real or imaginary experiences? Do you think there is any way to find out the difference for sure?

In a Spanish Science forum (//www.100cia.com) we have asked ourselves those same questions and we do believe there is a way to find out the difference for sure. This forum is specialized in Science and it has sub-forums for almost every Science field there is: Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, Biology, Medicine, Genetics, Engineering, Astronomy, Computer programming, etc., etc.

After several months debating this subject in depth, we have finally designed a very simple, but at the same time a very reliable and accurate scientific method, to verify if these experiences are real or imaginary.

Using this method, anybody who may have an OBE (Out of Body Experience) could very easily verify, in its own home and without having to use complicated technology, if his/her experiences are real or not. And that person could also give his relatives and friends very convincing scientific prove of the real nature of these experiences.

We have named this method "Agnostic Method" (AM) to verify astral traveling. This is the link in Spanish:

- Post #301 al #305, pag. 31. Detailed instructions of the Agnostic Method (original in Spanish):
http://www.100cia.com/opinion/foros/showthread.php?t=4290&page=31&pp=10

You'll find the English instructions of the Agnostic Method in this Post and in the next 3 Posts, that is, Post #1 to Post #4 of this page.

We would be very interested in contacting people who may know how to do astral travelling and would be willing to try out Agnostic Method to see what happens.

Best regards. qbeac.

---------------------------

HOW YOU CAN COLLABORATE IN THE EXPERIMENTS

Anybody may collaborate in the experiments in two ways: by being a "projector", or by helping a projector. In the second case we call that person the "controller".

In order to do the experiments, the idea is to go step by step, and to move forward with each particular projector in a very gradual manner, adjusting the experiment itself (tasks to perform, rhythm, etc.) to his/her own personal circumstances, level of expertise, and preferences. We would start with very easy things to do (very low level of difficulty), and little by little we will move forward till we finally try to get to the highest level each projector desires to reach. So it is up to you (projector) to decide how far you desire to go. We will simply move along with you offering our help in anything we can. That's the idea.

These are some important considerations about the experiments in general:

- The general instructions in English of the Agnostic Method are in the first page of this very thread:

- Method to verify if OBE are real or imaginary experiences (See Post #1 to Post #4)
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20907

- Variants of the Agnostic Method. As you can see in the previous link, the Agnostic Method includes several variants, or version, for instance: reading two words taken at random from a dictionary, reading numbers, digits, playing cards from a deck, etc. Plus, we can add other variants in case a particular projector is used to work with other types of targets (Ex: symbols, objects, etc.). In other words, you may suggest other variants if they are not already in the list and we will calculate the probability of guessing them by chance.

The variant of reading the two words from a dictionary is the most reliable one from a mathematical point of view, but it is not the only way to obtain scientific proof. There are also other possibilities and some of them maybe easier than the words' variant. Each projector may choose the variant that suits him/her the best. It's up to you to choose the method you feel more comfortable with. For instance, we could also do experiments with Group OBE, in which two persons meet in the astral plane and exchange relevant information. That's like having a conversation in the astral plane, which leads us to the next point: alternative methods of verification.

- Other alternative and valid methods of OBE, astral verification and abnormal phenomenon in general: Besides reading the words (or numbers, digits, etc.), there are other alternative and valid methods of verification (Ex: Group OBE, astral telekinesis, regular telekinesis, etc. In general, any abnormal phenomenon from the stand point of the scientific community will be a valid proof), and from the stand point of some projectors, some of the other methods maybe easier than reading the words. Each projector may decide which methods he/she prefers or feel more comfortable with. You'll find those other methods in section 4 of the "Instructions of the Agnostic Method" (check the following posts), or also in the following link:

- Post #3. I did a RTZ verification experiment this morning (Tombo)
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21581

- We are going to be talking regularly about the details of the experiment in the previous link. That will be our regular meeting place.

- This is very important: Projectors, don't worry, because we are not expecting perfect results!!! Partial results will also be good enough and will also be accepted by the scientific community. We have explained this topic in the following link:

- Post #8, pag. 8. Detailed explanation in English of "how the Agnostic Method works":
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=180207#180207

- Instructions about the RTZ (Real Time Zone). An experienced projector whose nick is Gav has written a very good article about the RTZ (Real Time Zone) in which he gives hints, suggestions and advice about how to avoid the distortions that sometimes appear between the astral plane and the physical plane. This is the link:

- Gav's Word document about the RTZ. I really encourage you to take a look at it because it is a very good resume. Please, read Gav's copyright instructions at the end of his document.
http://www.future-horizons.co.uk/doc/A_Short_Discourse_On_OBE_Perception.doc

- Converstaion with Gav at lilacsky forum (you may have to register to see it).
Section: Research and Study's
Thread: Are Astral Travel and OBE real or imaginary experi
http://lilacsky.proboards39.com/index.cgi?board=study&action=display&thread=1135185352

---------------------------

THE THREE STEPS TO PERFORM THE EXPERIMENTS

In order to perform the experiments, our idea is to divide the experiment in three stages, which we call "Level 1 validation", "Level 2 validation" and "Level 3 validation".

Level 1 validation. Personal validation. This is a first stage which consists of informal tests to allow the projector to practice in a very comfortable and familiar environment to try to get some positive results. You may use the help of your own family members, or your friends, to practice reading the words correctly (or whatever, symbols, objects, etc.). You may practice as long as you want, there is not any time limit. All you would need to do is to inform us every once in a while of your progress or your difficulties to see if we can solve them. You may quit the experiment at any time you wish, no questions asked.

Level 2 validation. Small group of person's validation. If the previous stage works out ok, then we would set up a person of our trust to control the projector with further tests, but also in a relaxed and flexible manner. We call that person "the controller". We may choose a person who lives somewhat close to you, just in case you would like to meet that person, but that's up to you. If we obtain positive results with a particular controller, we might change the controller a couple of times to make sure everything works ok (Ex: no jokes, fraud, mistakes, etc.). We might use doctors or researches to control the projector during this stage. They will probably place the target either at their own homes, or at their offices (hospitals, universities, etc.).

Level 3 validation. Validation for human kind. If the previous stage works out ok, our final step is to perform more serious tests with the help of several serious researches we have already contacted, such as The Monroe Institute, Dr. Jeff Long (the founder of the www.nderf.org), Dr. Tart, etc. We call this last step "Level 3 validation".

Note: Level 3 validation does not necessarily require for the projector having to go to a lab to perform the experiment. The projector may stay at home, as usual, and have his/her APs at the time he/she is used to have them. But we would set up a proper room in our facilities, such as a hospital in which one of the researches work, or a private office, or a university (Ex: University of Virginia), etc. The projector may have to visit the physical place at least once (or as many times he/she wants) to become familiar with it and to be able to get there during his/her AP. In that room we would place the target (words, symbols, objects, computer screen, etc.). The room will be locked up and it will also be designed to comply with all the necessary security measures (Ex: a faraday cage to prevent external tampering with electromagnetic waves, a lawyer or a notary public will certify the quality of the installation, etc.). But we may talk about the details of this last stage later.

- Publishing the results in a prestigious scientific journal. If we obtain positive results in the final step (Level 3 validation), our intention is to try to publish the results in a prestigious scientific journal with the help of all the serious researches who participate in the experiment.

- The confidentiality of the projector is guaranteed. At all times during the three stages (Level 1, 2 and 3), the confidentiality of the projector is guaranteed if he/she wishes to remain anonymous. You may keep using your Internet nick name. We do not need to know your real name. If we reach Level 3 validation, we may have to meet you in person (later on, we will have to consider if this is necessary or not), but in case we do meet in person anytime along the way, we will sign a "Confidentiallity Agreement" to guarantee you remain anonymous.

- Adjusting the experiment to each particular projector. We insist, any projector may enter and leave the experiment at any time he/she so desires. There is not any obligation at all on your part. You may try as many times as you want and during as long as you want. There is not any type of schedule or time limit. We believe natural phenomenon does not need to adapt to Science, on the contrary, it is Science the one that should try to adapt to natural phenomenon.

If you happen to know any projector who would be willing to collaborate with us, we encourage you to let them know about this experiment. Thanks.

Good luck to you if you try doing the experiment, and thank you very much for taking the time to read this document.

Take care. qbeac.

[qbeac]

SOME GOOD REASONS TO TRY TO OBTAIN SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF OBE

To begin with, I must say that I already believe these experiences are real (*1), among other reasons because I have had several ones myself, and I don't need further proof "for myself" (I have my "Level 1 validation" and that's good enough for me). Also, when I say "real" experiences as opposed to "imaginary" experiences, I mean it from the stand point of the scientific community, which only accepts as "real" the physical world (Ex: there could be many other "real" planes other than the physical plane). So, when I say "real" I mean "real from the reference point of the physical plane."

But if these experiences were to be "real from the reference point of the physical plane", that would have a tremendous importance for the scientific community, because it would imply that a human being can do things that they thought were IMPOSIBLE according to current scientific knowledge. Therefore, they would have to change, modify or update current scientific books. And that's a VERY big deal for modern science (for medicine, psychology, psychiatry, physics, etc.)!

Further more, in the case we could obtain scientific proof that AP are "real" experiences, and considering that nowadays just about everybody can have easy accesses to this "new" knowledge via the modern means of communication (specially via Internet, forums, etc.), it seems to me that we may be on the verge of an evolutionary change in society, or an evolutionary leap forward, and I mean a positive change. In other words, we may be on the verge of a huge paradigm shift, probably bigger and better than the previous ones (Ex: Galileo, Newton, Einstein...).
 
But in order for that change to happen, or to not be blocked, or to proceed, or to happen with a greater speed, or to consolidate itself, in my opinion, it is necessary to obtain empirical proof, or scientific proof, or conclusive proof that these experiences are "real" and not imaginary (please, remember, "real" according to the physical plane).
 
The scientific community has the key to facilitate or to promote that change, or the contrary, to block it or delay it. Because if the scientific community officially validates these experiences, that will open the door for the public recognition and acceptance of these experiences by the rest of humanity, and vice versa.
 
This situation is kind of similar to what happened in Galileo's time: first a great deal of opposition and rejection, but later on, and as the evidence kept piling up, it was simply impossible to deny it.

Therefore, if the final goal we all seem to agree upon is for just about every body in the world to have access to this new knowledge and to try to AP for themselves, so that they can spiritually grow and together build a better world, a happier world, with more justice, more tolerance, more solidarity, more love, etc.... if that's what we all want, it seems to me that the scientific community, for better or worse, has an important role to play in this process right now, because if the scientific community validates theses experiences as "real", the process will accelerate and more people will be able to practice AP sooner. But if the scientific community keeps on believing these experiences are "imaginary", the process will slow down or even be blocked during who knows how many more years or decades.

So, that's why I am personally so much interested in the scientific proof, more for macro-reasons rather than for micro-reasons. Scientific proof could facilitate or even speed up the whole process. But, that's only my personal opinion, and I might be wrong, I am not sure.

I would like to add one more thing:

Regarding the experiments we are doing, we are willing to adjust every single experiment to the circumstances and particularities of any projector, since we are very much aware that this is an experiment with "human beings", and each person may need a different environment to feel comfortable. Also, we believe natural phenomenon does not need to adapt to Science, on the contrary, it is Science the one that should try to adapt to natural phenomenon.

Un saludo, qbeac.

(*1) Note: when I say "the reality of these experiences", I mean "reality" from the reference point of the physical plane, because in theory there could be other planes just as real as the physical one. So we are taking about "relative realities."

---------------------------

ANOTHER GOOD REASON TO COLLABORATE IN THIS JOINT EFFORT:

HOWARD STORM'S NDE. A POSSIBLE BETTER FUTURE FOR HUMAN KIND

This is a good example of why perhaps it would be worth while trying to work together for the goal I mentioned in my previous post (trying to obtain scientific proof of OBEs). One of those reasons is because if the message of NDEs is truth, then it maybe possible for all of us to construct together a better future for human kind. And this "better future" includes a spiritual awakening, in which, and if I understand it correctly, Astral Projection might be a common thing to know among people.

The following NDE is an example of a possible better future for human kind:

Howard Storm's near-death experience
http://www.near-death.com/storm.html

The Therapy of Love
http://www.near-death.com/experiences/storm03.html

Brief excerpt:

My friends [the spiritual beings] explained, quite clearly, that all it takes to make a change was one person. One person, trying, and then because of that, another person changing for the better. They said that the only way to change the world was to begin with one person. One will become two, which will become three, and so on. That's the only way to affect a major change.

I inquired as to where the world would be going in an optimistic future – one where some of the changes they desired were to take place. The image of the future that they gave me then, and it was their image, not one that I created, surprised me.

My image had previously been sort of like Star Wars, where everything was space age, plastics, and technology. The future that they showed me was almost no technology at all.

What everybody, absolutely everybody, in this euphoric future spent most of their time doing was raising children. The chief concern of people was children, and everybody considered children to be the most precious commodity in the world. And when a person became an adult, there was no sense of anxiety, nor hatred, nor competition. There was this enormous sense of trust and mutual respect.

If a person, in this view of the future, became disturbed, then the community of people all cared about the disturbed person falling away from the harmony of the group. Spiritually, through prayer and love, the others would elevate the afflicted person.

What people did with the rest of their time was that they gardened, with almost no physical effort. They showed me that plants, with prayer, would produce huge fruits and vegetables. People, in unison, could control the climate of the planet through prayer. Everybody would work with mutual trust – and the people would call the rain, when needed, and the sun to shine. Animals lived with people, in harmony.

People, in this best of all worlds, weren't interested in knowledge; they were interested in wisdom. This was because they were in a position where anything they needed to know, in the knowledge category, they could receive simply through prayer. Everything, to them, was solvable. They could do anything they wanted to do.

In this future, people had no wanderlust, because they could, spiritually, communicate with everyone else in the world. There was no need to go elsewhere. They were so engrossed with where they were and the people around them that they didn't have to go on vacation. Vacation from what? They were completely fulfilled and happy.

Death, in this world, was a time when the individual had experienced everything that he or she needed to experience. To die meant to lie down and let go; then the spirit would rise up, and the community would gather around. There would be a great rejoicing, because they all had insight into the heavenly realm, and the spirit would join with the angels that came down to meet it. They could see the spirit leave and knew that it was time for the spirit to move on; it had outgrown the need for growth in this world. Individuals who died had achieved all they were capable of in this world in terms of love, appreciation, understanding, and working in harmony with others.

The sense I got of this beautiful view of the world's future was as a garden, God's garden. And in this garden of the world, full of all beauty, were people. The people were born into this world to grow in their understanding of the Creator. Then to shed this skin, this shell, in the physical world, and to graduate and move up into heaven – there, to have a more intimate and growing relationship with God.

---------------------------

PARADIGM SHIFTS

After reading Howard Storm's NDE, some people may wonder: Are such drastic changes in social mentality possible? Because those are some drastic changes indeed, as compared to current social mentality (year 2006). The question now would be: Are Paradigm Shifts possible at all? Are they realistic? Can they really happen or not?

In our opinion, yes, Paradigm Shifts are possible. It is truth that right now we are still living under the influence of the current scientific Paradigm (a materialistic view of life), but during the history of mankind, there have been many other Paradigms which, at the time, seemed IMPOSSIBLE to be changed. However, they finally did change and now they are obsolete.

So, nowadays (year 2005), the same thing could happen one more time. Why not?

These are some examples of old social beliefs and paradigms that did not stand.

Stone Age, Bronze Age, Iron Age, Roman Empire, "eye for eye, tooth for tooth", versus "love your enemy" (Jesus Christ), The Middle Age, Feudalism, Geocentric theory (Copernic and Galileo), Modern Science (Newton), The Industrial Revolution (18th, 19th century), Theory of Relativity (Einstein), slavery and racism (Martin Luther King), Apartheid (Nelson Mandela)...

The only doubt now is: when will the next Paradigm Shift take place, and who will collaborate to make it happen?

- Paradigm shift (Wikipedia)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigm_shift

- Scientific revolution (Wikipedia)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_revolution

Also, some serious scientific journals and scientists are beginning to pay a closer attention to some "paranormal" phenomenon, and some very good articles have started to be published in such journals. Just two examples of these pioneers:

- Dr. Pim van Lommel NDE study. Published in The Lancet, year 2001
http://profezie3m.altervista.org/archivio/TheLancet_NDE.htm
http://www.skepticalinvestigations.org/whoswho/vanLommel.htm

- What Emergency Department Staff Need to Know About Near-Death Experiences, year 2004
Debbie James MSN, RN, CCRN, CNS
From The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Tex.
Topics in Emergency Medicine. January/March 2004. Volume 26 Number 1. Pages 29 - 34
http://www.nursingcenter.com/library/JournalArticle.asp?Article_ID=493684
http://tomcoburnisabigfatjerk.blogspot.com/2005/03/near-death-experiences-part-iii.html

So, in our opinion, this could just be the beginning of the end of the current Paradigm. But it depends on us how much longer we stay in it.

Un saludo, qbeac.

[qbeac]

This is the main table where you can see the different variants of the Agnostic Method and their relative reliability level, which are based on the mathematical calculations of guessing different types of random numbers by chance. These calculations have been performed by two professional mathematicians (hetzer & leach) in two Spanish mathematics forums (100cia.com & MIGUI). See links bellow.

Please, we need help to translate to English more text from the Spanish Science forum with the 10 months long debate about astral travelling. Thanks.
In case anybody needs it, this is a good free translating web site: http://www.freetranslation.com/


TABLE 1 FOR THE "AGNOSTIC METHOD"

(Note: this table is not a final version. If you find any mistakes or bugs, please, let us know)

Post #301. Table 1 with the different versions of Agnostic Method (original post in Spanish):
http://www.100cia.com/opinion/foros/showthread.php?p=38484#post38484

Summary of TABLE 1. Probability of guessing by chance a random number.
(See the original table in Spanish bellow)

1.- Variant of the "3 ordered words chosen in a random way from a dictionary". The reliability has been calculated with 10,000 words (see note *1).
Probability of guessing by chance one time: 1.e-12, and that's the same as 0.000000000001
(11 zeros after the decimal point).

2.- Variant of the "2 ordered words chosen in a random way from a dictionary". The reliability has been calculated with 10,000 words (see note *1).
Probability of guessing by chance one time: 1.e-8, and that's the same as 0.00000001
(7 zeros after the decimal point).

3.- Variant of "code with a mixture of 5 numbers and capital letters". Example: JF7AS.
Probability of guessing by chance one time: 1.442e-8, and that's the same as 0.00000001442
(7 zeros after the decimal point).

4.- Variant of "code with a mixture of 4 numbers and capital letters". Example: G4K2.
Probability of guessing by chance one time: 5.336e-7, and that's the same as 0.0000005336
(6 zeros after the decimal point).

5. - Variant of "cipher of the 5 random numbers" (from 0 to 9).
This is like in "Cupon de la ONCE" (Spanish lottery game, good reference point!). Example: 78153
Website for the "Cupon de la ONCE" game: http://www.once.es/home.cfm?opcion=1&orden=1&ultimos=ok
Probability of guessing by chance one time: 1.e-5, and that's the same as 0.00001
(4 zeros after the decimal point).

6.- Variant of "cipher of the 4 random numbers" (from 0 to 9). Example: 4179
Probability of guessing on time: 1.e-4, and that's the same as 0.0001
(3 zeros after the decimal point).

7.- Variant of "two ordered cards taken at random from a Spanish deck" (40 cards: Aces, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 plus king, queen and duke- 3 types of figure cards- Spanish deck basically are equal to others).
Probability of guessing by chance one time: 6.4e-4, and that's the same as 0.00064
(3 zeros after the decimal point).

8.- Variant of "the book taken at random from a home book-shelf" (with 140 books).
Probability of guessing by chance one time: 7.14e-3, and that's the same as 0.00714
(2 zeros after the decimal point).

(1*) Clarification about the calculation of the words taken at random from a dictionary: We counted the common words of 12 distinct pages taken at random from the dictionary. Type of dictionary: Salvat editions, just one volume, 1,382 pages. We found that about 39% of the words are rare or very rare. That means that about 61% of the words are easily understood. To this number we applied a reduction factor of 50% (just for safety reasons, to be sure) and that dropt the % to 30%. So, from 59,000 words in a dictionary only 30% are common or easily understood, and that give us 17,700 words. If you think that 30% is too high, let's suppose that only 20% of the words are common, so we would get 11,800 words (and that's already too little). Finally, round that number down even more and you get about 10,000 common words (approx. = 17% of 59,000).

Just one clarification about the probability of guessing when you repeat the experiment many times:

[Hetzer, a professional mathematician from 100cia.com, says]: If you make two experiments, the probability of guessing both of them is equal to the square number of guessing just one of the events one time.

Let's see only the example of the dictionary (when you take 2 random words [case number 2) in the above Table]), and the rest of the variants would be calculated in a similar way:

Probability of guessing by chance two times: (1.e-8)^2 = 1.e-16, that's the same as 0,0000000000000001
(15 zeros after the decimal point).

Probability of guessing by chance three times: (1.e-8)^3 = 1.e-24, that's the same as 0,000000000000000000000001
(23 zeros after the decimal point).

Those two very small numbers are considered an infinitesimal probability (according to statistical and mathematical calculations) and will be a valid scientific proof from a scientific point of view.

Of course, the more positive results you obtain, the more conclusive the proof will be. But guessing just one or two times in a role (under appropriate control measures) will catch the attention of the scientific community.

The idea is for independent scientists to be able to replicate the same experiments many times, and not necessarily obtaining 100% perfect results, but simply "mathematically significant results", such as 20%, 30%, 40%... positive results, and always speaking of results in comparison to the "control group", which does not do Astral Projection (AP) and is expected to obtain a percentage of positive results very close to zero ("0"). If this could be done, the scientific community will finally become convinced of the validity of the results.

Note: it is really, really, really hard to guess those two words just by pure chance (much harder than guessing a lottery ticket), and that's why we would expect for the control group to probably get zero correct guesses, or very close to zero.

P.S. For more information on these calculations (formulas, procedures, etc.), see these links:

- Spanish mathematics forum: 100cia.com. Hetzer is the professional mathematician who performed most of the above calculations:
http://100cia.com/opinion/foros/showthread.php?t=5303

- Spanish mathematics forum: MIGUI. Leach is the professional mathematician who revised the calculations in Table 1:
http://foro.migui.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=1119

In case anybody needs a translator, this is a good free translating web site: http://www.freetranslation.com/

[qbeac]

INSTRUCTIONS OF THE AGNOSTIC METHOD

(Note: these instructions are not a final version. If you find any mistakes or bugs, please, let us know)

Post #302. Detailed instructions of Agnostic Method: (Original Post in the Spanish Science Forum):
http://www.100cia.com/opinion/foros/showthread.php?p=38484#post38484

"The "Agnostic Method" is a very reliable and trust worthy method that allows any one to proof to himself, and in a scientific way, whether his experiences (Ex: OBE, astral projection) are real or imaginary (Note: such personal verification is called a "Level 1" verification). This method is also a good way to show, or even to demonstrate, the real nature of your experiences to your friends & relatives, and thus to eliminate any doubts that they may have about it (verifications for small groups of people are called "Level 2" verifications).

There are many variations in the way you may apply the "Agnostic Method", like for example: variant of the words taken at random from a dictionary, variant of the card in a deck, variant of the codes with numbers and letters, etc. Every person is free to choose the variant he wants, but he must take into account that each one of them has a different level of trustiness (or reliability), that is, some are more reliable than others.

In Appendix 1 there is information about the method, about the definition of Levels 1, 2 and 3 and there is an explanation of the trustiness of all the variants by taking into account the probabilities calculated by Hertz & Leach (two professional mathematicians) in the Math's forum in 100cia.com and MIGUI (august and oct-05). In Appendix 2 there is also an explanation of how this method can be applied to lab experiments according to all the proper steps and guarantees of the "Scientific Method", and such verifications are called "Level 3" verifications.


1- Instructions for the "variant of the words taken at random from a dictionary":

Note: The following method described in this paper to select a word taken at random from a dictionary is a manual method, but it has the advantage of allowing anybody to do it very easily and without having to use any kind of technology at all. But in case somebody wanted to use a more precise way to select a random number (word, card, etc.), we must point out there are other more sophisticated methods to do that, with computer programs, or random generating routines, and even with military precision.

1.1- Find a dictionary of your language of just one volume (any one with about 60,000 words).

1.2- Create a little "home made lottery barrel" [like the ones you see in lottery games] to choose at random the words from the dictionary. This how to do it: write in a paper numbers from 0 to 9 and cut them in equal pieces. Fold the papers and put them inside a small container (Ex: a glass, vase, or any similar container).

1.3- Take one number at random without looking at it. After you extract it, then look at it and write it down on another paper, and then fold it back again and put it back in the container. Repeat the operation until you complete the cipher of the number of pages existing in the dictionary. For example, if your dictionary has 1,500 pages (that's a 4 cipher number) you should pick up a number and put it back in the container four times [repeat four times that process of "picking a paper-seeing the number- putting it back"]. Of course, if you are the projector, you may want to ask a friend of yours to do this operation (to pick several couples of words for you and write them on different papers), so that you do not know what the words are. Your friend could give you all paper inside a closed folder, and you could pick each paper without looking at it and place it in an appropriate place, so that it is ready for you to look at it while you have the OBE.

1.4- Search for the page that you were looking for [the page found in 1.3-, read above] but be careful not to open it up completely. Just look on the corners of the page and avoid reading any thing from that page in the process. When you find the page, open it up completely with your eyes closed.

1.5- With your eyes closed do the following: put the dictionary in the middle of the table (which should be empty) and with your hands, give an impulse to it to make it spin around several times over the table. Take away your hands from the dictionary while it is turning, to make sure that when you touch it again you don't know its final position. Now, while pointing with a finger into the air (and still with your eyes closed), slowly bring your finger down until it touches any place of the dictionary.

1.6- Now, open your eyes and look which word your finger landed on. Write down the word if it's a normal word (easy to understand). If it is a strange word or one difficult to understand, repeat again all the process starting in point 1.3.

1.7- When you have gotten 2 or 3 random words, write them in any normal paper (Ex: A4 format) in a way that will allow the projector to read it. If you are the projector, ask someone else to do it for you [the other person should be the one choosing at random the words, not you].

1.8- If it is a Level 1 or Level 2 experiment, there are many ways to set in place the paper with the words. The paper can be put in different places and in different ways, such as on the wall of the room, or inside a closet, etc. This will be described later in point 3 (to be included later).

The next point is VERY important: When you write down the words, there are several things that you may do to help the projector read them correctly.


2- Hints to help the projector reading the words correctly:

2.1- According to the accounts from people that have experienced OBEs, the astral plane and the physical plane are very similar, but sometimes they may present some differences or distortions. Experienced projectors talk about the RTZ (Real Time Zone), which is a very similar "copy" of the physical plane. For that reason, and in order to help the reader (projector) to read the right words (and not false words), there are a few hints (aids, tips) that all of you could use, and they will help you to focus properly and to increase your capacity of viewing the numbers correctly (or cards, or words from a dictionary, etc.).

2.2.- Those hints have been designed to avoid "false positives",[/u][/color] which will diminish the total reliability of the results, and specially from the standpoint of the scientific community.

Example of a "false positive": While in the astral plane you read the cards and you clearly see "number 8". Then you awake up and in the physical world the card is "number 2" and not "number 8".

2.3.- Conclusion: you should take into consideration that if you repeat the experiment several times with positive results, that will increase ENORMOUSLY the credibility of this method (See Table 1 for more details on these probability calculations). On the contrary, it is very important to try to avoid "false positives", because they will diminish very much the credibility of this method.

Possible hints to read the words might include but are not limited to the following:

A) Write in front of the words 2 distinct numbers that the projector (the one having OBEs) already knows before hand from the physical plane (he can even choose this numbers himself) in order to help him "focus" better on the words. If the projector is not able to recognize the numbers (while in the OBE state) that he already knew from the physical plane, that will be a sign that something is going wrong, and vice versa. For example, the projector already knows the numbers 25 and 47, but not the words, so we would write in the paper something like this:

25 HORSE
47 DOOR

B) Write the words in more than one paper at the same time (Ex: 2, 3, 4 different papers), and maybe on papers and with inks of different colours, or also using different types of materials instead of just paper (Ex: paper, metal, wood, plastic, a black board, etc). How complicated this hint becomes is up to you. The idea is to make sure that when you are looking at all of the papers (or all of the materials) from the astral plane, all of them should have the same words written on them, and if there are differences, you will know that something is going wrong.

Due to the differences between the astral plane and the physical plane, all of the above are ways to help the person having the OBE or AP to read the correct words.

Important note: There is a Word document written by a projector named Gavin Howden which gives a lot of instructions and explanations about the RTZ (Real Time Zone) and how to avoid the distortions that some times appear between the physical plane and the astral plane. You'll find this document at link (note: you may have to register in that forum in order to see the post):

Section: Research and Study's
Thread: Are Astral Travel and OBE real or imaginary experi
http://lilacsky.proboards39.com/index.cgi?board=study&action=display&thread=1135185352

The same Gav's Word document may be downloaded at link (Please, check his copyright instructions at the end of his document):
http://www.future-horizons.co.uk/doc/A_Short_Discourse_On_OBE_Perception.doc


3- Security measures to apply in Level 2 verifications (for small groups of people):

3.1- If the experiment is not intended for just one person (the self projector, Level 1) but for a small group of people (friends, family; Level 2) you should take some security measures to avoid errors, cheats, somebody kidding you, etc.

3.2- Such measures will be added later in the following link:

(insert link) [this is not my error, in the original message there is a missing link in the time i write this].


4- Other alternative and valid methods of OBE and astral verification:

The Agnostic Method (Ex: feading the words from the dictionary) is not the only method to verify if OBE are real or imaginary experiences. There are other methods, and some of them may be easier for the projector than reading the words. For instance, instead of reading words, you could use or symbols, numbers, cards from a deck, etc., as it is described above, but you could also use physical objects of different forms, shapes and colours, or we could set up a computer program to show easy to remember images in a computer screen. We could also experiment with Group OBEs, in which two persons try to meet in the astral plane (not necessarily in a particular location within the physical plane) and exchange relevant information (Note: some projectors claim this is possible to do, and maybe easier than reading the words). Another method of verification would be by astral telekinesis while in the astral plane, that is, while you are in the astral plane, you would need to move a physical object which is in the physical plane (Note: some people claim they can do that, and it would be simple way to verify these experiences).

We have discussed more in depth those other methods of verification in the following link:

- Thread: "I did a RTZ verification experiment this morning" (see Post #3)
http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=21581


P.S. For more details about the Agnostic Method, see this link with the original instructions in Spanish:

Post #301 and #302. Table 1 and instructions of the Agnostic Method:
http://www.100cia.com/opinion/foros/showthread.php?p=38484#post38484

[Draege]

Your assumption that seeing these words while in an OBE state will confirm that the OBE state is "real" (and by real I mean visiting the physical world) is however incorrect. It is still open up to a great deal of explanations and possibilities. In this OBE state we often experience hightened psychic awareness. Even if perhaps this test worked or the infamous card test worked, doesn't guarantee that you actually visited the physical world and instead simply had a pyshic-influenced event during the OBE. *THOSE* happen often.

So all I'm saying is, it can be used as evidence, but not proof. If you're looking for proof of the existance of psychic prediction, almost everyone on this board probably has a personal OBE story for you about it.

[qbeac]

Your assumption that seeing these words while in an OBE state will confirm that the OBE state is "real" (and by real I mean visiting the physical world) is however incorrect. It is still open up to a great deal of explanations and possibilities. In this OBE state we often experience hightened psychic awareness. Even if perhaps this test worked or the infamous card test worked, doesn't guarantee that you actually visited the physical world and instead simply had a pyshic-influenced event during the OBE. *THOSE* happen often.

So all I'm saying is, it can be used as evidence, but not proof. If you're looking for proof of the existance of psychic prediction, almost everyone on this board probably has a personal OBE story for you about it.

Hi Draege, thanks for your comments.

No, that is not our assumption: that "the OBE state is real". We simply say that "the experience is indeed real" and "not a product of your imagination", (Ex: dream, hallucination, etc.) whatever that experience may be (Ex: OBE, remote vision, etc.). And for right now we are not going to get into what type of experience that was (that would be the second step). For right now and during the first stage of this research, it is very important to differentiate between "the OBE state" and "the experience" (in general).

But as I said in my previous posts, in the Spanish Science forum (//www.100cia.com) we have been talking about this issue in depth for around 10 months by now (starting January-2005), and many things have been said so far about it (that means hundreds of posts, dozens of pages and around 30.000 visits). So, this issue would require a longer, more precise and more accurate explanation than the one I gave in posts 1 through 4 or even in this one. And you are right: perhaps those were not very good or complete explanations; sorry.

That's why we asked for the collaboration of Spanish-English volunteer translators, because there are several key points of that debate that should be considered first in order to talk about the rest of the subject, but right now all that text is in Spanish. One thing we would need to do first is to properly define each concept, and the other thing is to state clearly what our assumptions are exactly.

For instance, one important piece of data is Table 1, which contains the calculations made in the mathematics forum of the probabilities of guessing different types of random numbers by chance. That would be a good starting point for this discussion. I have already posted Table 1 in post #3 for anyone who may want to take a close look at it. As soon as we have some time, we'll translate it to English.

In case anybody needs it, this is a good free translating web site: http://www.freetranslation.com/

Chao, qbeac.

[Kazbadan]

Here goes my translation. I am not spanish but i understand a little. I was unable to translate the name of the game "cupon the de la once" and i was unable to understand the meaning of the right bracket words (near the end): [Dice Hetzer]. With this last exception, all the right bracket words are mine, just to help to clarify the translation or something more. Finally, i am not at english (as you know i speak portuguese) so any mistakes in the translation or spelling are my fault.

Here goes:
"This is a sheet with the level of trustiness of every variant of the Agnostic Method. It was not been verified, so if you find any mistakes, please say it. Thanks.

Resume of Sheet 1:
(Probability of guessing a number):

1- Variant of the "3 ordinated words choosen in a random way in a dictionary". The trustiness has been calculated with a dictionary of 10000 words (see side note *1 [see below after the sheet]).
Probability of guessing once: 1.e-12 and thats the same as 0,000000000001 (eleven zeros after the first one).

2- Variant of the "2 ordinated words choosen in a random way in a dictionary". The trustiness/probalility has been calculated in a base of 10000 words dictionary (see side note *1).
Probability of guessing once: 1.e-8 and thats the same as 0,00000001 (seven zeros after the first one).

3- Variant of "code with a mix of 5 numbers and capital letters". Example: JF7AS.
Probability of guessing one time: 1.442.e-8 and thats the same as 0,00000001442 (seven zeros after the first one).

4- - Variant of "code with a mix of 4 numbers and capital letters". Example: G4K2.
Probability of guessing once: 5336.e-7 and thats the same as 0,0000005336 (six zeros after the first one).

5 - Variant of "cipher of the 5 random numbers (from 0 to 9), like in the "Cupón de la Once" [unable to translate: it was the name of a game of luck] (this is a good reference point). Example: 78153
(website for the "cupón de la ONCE" game): http://www.once.es/home.cfm?opcion=1&orden=1&ultimos=ok
Probability of guessing once: 1.e-5 and thats the same as 0,00001 (four zeros after the first one).

6- Variant of "cipher of the 4 random numbers" (from 0 to 9). Example: 4179
Probability of guessing once: 1.e-4 and thats the same as 0,0001 (three zeros after the first one).

7- Variant of "two ordinated cards take at random from a spanish deck" (40 cards: Aces, 2,3,4,5,6,7 plus king, queen and duke- [3 types of figure cards- spanish deck basically are equal to others]).
Probability of guessing once: 6.4.e-4 and thats the same as 0,00064 (three zeros after the first one).

8- Variant of "book take at random from a home book-shelf" (with 140 books).
Probability of guessing once: 7.14e-3 and thats the same as 0,00714 (two zeros after the first one).

(1*) Clarification about the calculation of the  words taken at random from a dictionary:One as counted the common words of 12 distinct pages of the dictionary, take at random (dictionary of Salvat editions, just one tome). About 39% of the words are rare or very rare. That means that about 61% of the words are easly understood. To this it was apllied a reduction factor of 50% (just for safe, to be shure) and that drops the % to 30%. So, from 59000 words in a dictionary only 30% are common or easly understood, and that give us 17700 words. If you think that 30% is high lets suppose that only 20% of the words are common (and thats very little), we would get 11800 words. Round that number down and you get about 10000 common words (aprox = 17% of 59000).

Just one clarification about the probability of guessing when you repeat the experiment many times:

[Dice hetzer]: If you make two experiments, the probability of guessing both of them is equal to the square number of guessing just one of the events once.

Lets see the example of the dictionary (when you take 2 random words [case number 2) in the above sheet]):
Probability of guessing twice: (1.e-8)^2 = 1.e-16 and thats the same as 0,0000000000000001 (15 zeros after the first one)."

[Kazbadan]

I dont have time to write, now, but i just want to say the 2 methods that will use:

1) Method of the 3 card: take 3 random cards (without seeing!, lol) at put them (and the deck) in a place where no body can reach (a high book shel for instance). Then you must guess the 3 cards.

2) Five numbers method, like the method number 5) from the above list: i created 5 numbers of each from 0 to 9 (5 number 0, 5 number 1s, five number 2s, etc) using piece of papers (to help i printed the numbers in computer).

I cutted some slice of the papers in a way that allows me, with closed eyes, to see if i am touching the correct side of the paper. Then, with closed eyes, i put the 5 numbers in a high place. Then you just need to obe. I still dont know how to have volunteer obes but i made the experiment because sometimes i have spontaneous obes.

[qbeac]

Here goes my translation....

Hi Kazbadan, thanks a lot, you did a very good job. Let me clarify the doubts:

"Cupon de la ONCE": This is the name of a specific lottery draw in Spain. It is very well known in Spain. Many people have either bought it some time, or know somebody who has bought it. That's why it is a good reference point in relation to the other options (words in a dictionary, playing cards, etc.), because people have a good "psychological perception" of the difficulty of guessing it by chance. Many people have probably bought it during many years and have never won the prize, and it only has 5 digits.

Please, if you know of any well known lottery number (or draw, or prize) in the USA (or other countries), we could calculate the probabilities of guessing to it by chance and include it in Table 1. That will give American people their own reference point.

"[Dice Hetzer]": This means "Hetzer says:" Hetzer is the Internet nick name of a professional mathematician from the mathematics sub-forum of the Science forum //www.100cia.com. Hetzer is the one who did the calculations of the options in Table 1. By the way, "100cia" is read a "Science" in Spanish, because the number "100" sounds as "cien", therefore: "cien-cia."

"Agnostic Method": Agnostic is the nick name of the person who "invented" this method. He invented version number 8:

8- Variant of "book take at random from a home book-shelf" (with 140 books).
This is the post were he had the idea:

- Post #216. pag.22. Original idea of the Agnostic Method for Astral verification (home book-shelf):
http://100cia.com/opinion/foros/showthread.php?t=4290&page=21&pp=10
http://100cia.com/opinion/foros/showthread.php?t=4290&page=22&pp=10

... then, we started thinking of ways to improve the reliability of this method. We calculated several ones and finally came to the conclusion that the best option, the MOST reliable one by far!!!, is number one and two: "words choosen in a random way in a dictionary."

Kazbadan, I may check a few small details of Table 1 and post it in english in Post #3 of this thread, but the basic translation is already done and it is a very good translation.

Thanks again. qbeac.

[qbeac]

Hi everybody, I have included the detailed instructions in Spanish of the Agnostic Method in Post #4 of this thread. If somebody could help us translating them to English we would appreciate it very much. Thanks. qbeac.

[Kazbadan]

qbeac, i forgot to say that anyone (and you of course!) can copy the text and "refine" my translation. i think that its not bad enough, since people understand (i hope ) what i wrote. So, dont be afraid to correct me...you must do worst than that to offend me .

Now, if you think that is not that bad, i may try to translate the rest. I dont know if today i will have time.

I´ve made a table in excel and looking into it i could understand that we optimize the "5 random numbers (from 0 to 9)" experience if we use eleven symbols (instead of just ten, from 0 to 9) and 8 random numbers.

I mean: you have 8 cards with number 0, 8 cards with number one printed one it...etc until you get 8 cards with another symbol (like a star..making the eleventh symbol) printed on it. Then you choose (without looking) 8 symbols at random, from these 88 cards (8 x 11) and put them into order and try to guess. Why 11 symbols? Well, i thought on using 15 symbols and 5 cards of each but that will not give a good probability check. Then i thought on using 16 symbols and 6 cards, and so on. finally i made a sheet on excel and cncluded that with 11 symbols and 8 cards you will have the best possibility by using less than 90 cards (you use 88). Using more than that is to much work (yeah...imagine doing so much cards!). So, for less than 90 cards, thats the best combination.

The probability is even better than in the dictionary idea (the secon option only) because the probability of guessing once is 4,66e-9 (0,00000000466).

[David Warner]

Kazbadan and Qbeac,

I've been working on the card experiment for the last 4 months now and have had some great success. The first time was right on the target, the other times proved inaccurate findings. Although, within the experiences other validations have emerged along the way. Here's the post and thread for you to read up on.

http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=19831

I strongly suggest those people out there interested in this experiment to use a excel spreadsheet, write everything down and make sure that the card is taped to the door face down. So far I've had six attempts to viewing the cards and this didn't come over night.. so making sure that you are persistent and don't give up!!

Tvos

[Kazbadan]

The voice of silence: i will read your post later, now its too late and i only have time to post what i just translated. Again, in right brackets i wrote my own words that may halp to clarify some point or something in the translation. Again, my english is not good but i think that everybody can understand the translation. Any mistakes or doubts, ask me (or to qbeac, i think he can help if he dont mind ). Later i will post methods that i will try to invent.

Here goes:
"The "Agnostic Method" is a thrustworthy method that allows any one to proof to himself, and in a scientific way, thats his OBEs are real and not just hallucinations (Note: such personal comprovation is called a "Level 1" comprovation). Also, is a good way to show to your friends & family a demonstration of the real nature of your OBEs, and in this way eliminate any doubts that they may have about it (comprovations to small groups are Level 2 comprovations).

There are many variations on the way you may apply the "Agnostic Method", like for example: variant of the words taken at random in a dictionary, variant of the card in a deck, variant of the codes with numbers and letters,etc. Every person is free to choose the variant that he wants, but he must take into account the trustiness of it.

In Annex 1 there is information about the method, about the definition of level 1, 2 and 3 and there is an explanation of the trustiness of all the variants, by taking into account the probailitys calculated by Hertz in Maths forum in 100cia.com (august-05). In Annex 2 there is also an explanation saying that this method can be apllied to lab experiments, by following all the steps and guarantees of the Scientific Method, and such comprovations are called "Level 3".

1- Instructions to the "variant of the words taken at random in a dictionary":

1.1- Find a dictionary of your language in just one tome (any one with about 60000 words).

1.2- Create a little "home made lottery barrel" [like the ones you see in lottery] to choose at random the words of the dictionary. Way how to do it: write in a paper numbers from 0 to 9 and cut them in equal pieces. Fold the papers and put them in a vase or any similar container.

1.3- Take one number at random without looking. Look to the paper and point down which number is, and then folder the paper again and  put it back again in the vase/container. Repeat the operation until until you complete the cipher of the number of pages existing in the dictionary. for example, if your dictionary has 1500 pages (its 4 cipher number) you should pick up a number and put it back in the vase, four times [repeat four times that process of "pick a paper-see the number- put it back"].

1.4- Search for the page that you were looking for [the page found in 1.3-, read above] but with careful. Just look into the corners of the page and avoid read any thing in the process. When you find the page, open it completly with you eyes closed.

1.5- With your eyes closed do the following: put your dictionary in an empty table and with your hands, give an impulse to it, and make it wheel many times in the table [wheel/turn around himself]. Take away your hands while in the process to make shure that when you touch it you dont know the position of the dictionary. Now, while pointing with a finger into the air, slowly make your finger touch any place of the dictionary.

1.6- Now, write the word if its a normal word. If is a strange word or one difficult to understand, repeat all the process, starting in 1.3) again.

1.7- When you have 2-3 random words write them in any normal paper (like A4 format) in a way that will allow the projector to read it. If you are the projector, ask someone else to do it for you [he must be the one choosing at random the words, not you].

1.8- If is a Level 1 or 2 experiment, there are many ways to put the words. The paper can be put in different places and in different ways. This will be described later in point 3 (to be included later).

When you write the words, there are some things that we may do to help the projector.

2- Help on reading the words:

2.1- From what is told from people that experimented OBEs, the astral plane and the physical plane are very similar, but sometimes they may present some differences. For that reason, and with the objective of helping the reader (projector) you could give some "tips" that will help him know if he is "seeing" well or if he is making a good "focus" in the words. For  example:

A) Write in front of the words 2 distinct numbers that the projector (the one having OBEs) already knows (he can even choose this numbers) in order to help him "focus" better on the words. If the projector is not able to recognize the numbers [while having the OBE], that he already knew, that is a sign that something goes wrong and vice versa. For example, the projector already knew the numbers 25 and 47, but not the words, so we would write in the paper something like this:

25 HORSE
47 DOOR

B) Write the words in more than one paper (2,3,4 papers)and who knows, using different colours or in different types of materials (like paper, metal, etc). Such help is something to you. The idea is to make sure that every paper has the same words and if there are differences (in the words, while projecting) you will know that something goes wrong. These are ways to help the experiment, due to the differences between astral plane and physical plane.

3- Security measures to apply in Level 2 comprovations (for small groups of people):

3.1- If the experiment is not for one person (the self projector, Level 1) but for a small group of people (friendsm family, Level 2) you should take some security measures to avoid errors, cheats, etc.

3.2- Such measures will be added later in the following link:

(insert link) [this is not my error, in the original message there is a missing link in the time i write this].

Now will follow a list of links about the Agnostic Method (i dont have sure if there is any missing link [again, this is not me, but the author writing].:

çãçõçé- Post #216. pag.22. El Método Agnostic de Verificación Astral (libro de estantería):
http://100cia.com/opinion/foros/showthread.php?t=4290&page=22&pp=10
- Post #221. pag. 23. Otra variante del Método Agnostic con palabras elegidas al azar en un libro o diccionario:
http://100cia.com/opinion/foros/showthread.php?p=35568#post35568
- Post #285. pag. 29. Mejora del MA con el bombo de lotería casero:
http://www.100cia.com/opinion/foros/showthread.php?p=37626#post37626
- Post #286, pag. 29. Aplicación del Método Agnostic al Hemi Sync.
http://www.100cia.com/opinion/foros/showthread.php?p=37703#post37703
- Foro de matemáticas. Cálculo de probabilidades de acertar por casualidad un número:
http://100cia.com/opinion/foros/showthread.php?t=5303
- Post #280. pag. 28. Probabilidades consideradas significativas según foro matemáticas de 100cia.com (cálculos hechos por Hetzer):
http://www.100cia.com/opinion/foros/showthread.php?t=4290&page=28&pp=10

"

[qbeac]

I dont have time to write, now, but i just want to say the 2 methods that will use:

1) Method of the 3 card: take 3 random cards (without seeing!, lol) at put them (and the deck) in a place where no body can reach (a high book shel for instance). Then you must guess the 3 cards.

2) Five numbers method, like the method number 5) from the above list: i created 5 numbers of each from 0 to 9 (5 number 0, 5 number 1s, five number 2s, etc) using piece of papers (to help i printed the numbers in computer).

I cutted some slice of the papers in a way that allows me, with closed eyes, to see if i am touching the correct side of the paper. Then, with closed eyes, i put the 5 numbers in a high place. Then you just need to obe. I still dont know how to have volunteer obes but i made the experiment because sometimes i have spontaneous obes.

Hi Kazbadan, thank you very much for all your help, we really appreciate it. There are several other interesting posts from 100cia.com that would be worth while translating to English, because they explain key issues of this research project. If you, Kazbadan, or anybody else would like to help with the translations, it would be great, because working together we will be able to accomplish more than working alone or independently.

Kazbadan, I wanted to ask you something:

The experiments you mention in your post (3 random cards and 5 digit number), have you already obtained any results with them?

Thanks. qbeac.

[qbeac]

Kazbadan and Qbeac,

I've been working on the card experiment for the last 4 months now and have had some great success. The first time was right on the target, the other times proved inaccurate findings. Although, within the experiences other validations have emerged along the way. Here's the post and thread for you to read up on.

http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=19831

I strongly suggest those people out there interested in this experiment to use a excel spreadsheet, write everything down and make sure that the card is taped to the door face down. So far I've had six attempts to viewing the cards and this didn't come over night.. so making sure that you are persistent and don't give up!!


Tvos

Hi "the voice of silence", nice to meet you. Tvos, I have read your whole experience and it is beautiful. I mean this one:

http://www.astralpulse.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=19831

I do not know how to do astral travelling, I have only had several special experiences, including several lucid dreams that were very interesting and at least one of them was also lots of fun (the other ones were not too fun). But I would like to learn how to astral project (I am learning). In the meantime we are doing scientific research about astral travelling, because we believe the reality of these experiences could be scientifically verified (in case they are in fact real). So, I would like to ask you about your experiments with the cards:

Besides the one you describe in the previous link, whose results are pretty good, and even more considering it is the first time you attempt to do the experiment, have you tried more times? I ask this because, unfortunately, those first results would not be conclusive from a scientific standpoint. In the scientific field they would probably ask for a higher reliability level, more in the order of the two words taken at random from a dictionary (1.e-8, which is the same as 1 x 10^8, or as 0,00000001).

I also encourage all of you to try to do the experiments of reading the numbers (or cards, etc.) with the most reliable methods. That way they will have a greater convincing power from the standpoint of the scientific community.

Also, if you repeat the experiment several times with positive results, that will increase ENORMOUSLY the credibility of this method (See Table 1 for more details). And it is also very important to try to avoid "false positive" (I'll explain that bellow), because they will diminish very much the credibility of this method.

So, I would like to ask you, have you tried the same type of experiments more times? And what were the results?... please, if you could comment a little bit about that I would appreciate it.

I would also like to call the attention of all of you to the fact that there are a few hints (aids) that all of you could use to help you focussing properly and to increase your capacity of viewing the numbers correctly (or cards, or words from a dictionary, etc.).

Those hints have been designed to prevent "false positives", which will diminish the total reliability of the results.

Example of a "false positive": While in the astral plane you read the cards and you clearly see "number 8". Then you awake up and in the physical world the card is "number 2" and not "number 8".

It is important that we try to avoid these false positive, because they will diminish the credibility of these experiments. That's the intention of the hints: To help you avoiding "false positives"!

Those hints are described in point 2 of the Instructions of the Agnostic Method. Let me reproduce them here, and as soon as I have some time I'll try to refine a little bit the translation and post the whole thing in the first 2 o 3 posts of this thread, so that it is easily available to everybody.

These are the hints to focus properly during the astral state, or let me say that better: To help you "know" if you are focussing correctly:

2- Help on reading the words:

2.1- From what is told from people that experimented OBEs, the astral plane and the physical plane are very similar, but sometimes they may present some differences. For that reason, and with the objective of helping the reader (projector) you could give some "tips" that will help him know if he is "seeing" well or if he is making a good "focus" in the words. For example:

A) Write in front of the words 2 distinct numbers that the projector (the one having OBEs) already knows (he can even choose this numbers) in order to help him "focus" better on the words. If the projector is not able to recognize the numbers [while having the OBE], that he already knew, that is a sign that something goes wrong and vice versa. For example, the projector already knew the numbers 25 and 47, but not the words, so we would write in the paper something like this:

25 HORSE
47 DOOR

B) Write the words in more than one paper (2, 3, 4 papers)and who knows, using different colours or in different types of materials (like paper, metal, etc). Such help is something to you. The idea is to make sure that every paper has the same words and if there are differences (in the words, while projecting) you will know that something goes wrong. These are ways to help the experiment, due to the differences between astral plane and physical plane.

[David Warner]

Qbeac,

Thank You on the reading of my experiments with the validation of playing cards. I was a little taken by the side on the first attempt with the conscious and false awakening.

To this date I've been able to conduct on these dates card validations:

07/14/05 - Playing card - validate
08/11/05 - Playing card - non-validate
08/11/05 - Playing card - non-validate but precognition of that day for rain
08/30/05 - Playing card - non-validate
09/18/05 - No playing card - but precog validate of mom going to hospital
09/27/05 - No playing card - but my dog Leroy picked up my prescence
               while oobe and started barking.
10/13/05 - Playing card - non-validate

Even though my success rate was not accurate with the cards, but other validations deffinitely came about. One thing I would like to point out when viewing the cards. The suit or the card number/letter would closely remain the same and not shift. On occassion at times, I would see a slight change from a heart to a spade and back to heart, but it was rare. I would first see the playing card, look at it, look away coupe of times and back at the card where the suit remained the same.

Along with this, here's the break down from 4/27/05 to 10/13/2005 in a
five month period of my rate of projections:

Lucid Dream to Projection: 6 times
False Awakening: 4 times
Conscious Astral Projection (from waking state): 31 times

Its been at least 7 times per month that I'm able to project and this is about one to two times per week. Although, lately little by little its been increasing as I become better skilled in recognizing the trance state.

I've been also monitoring my Food and Sleep stats seeing if there are any trends that make the projection favorable. My higher success rate is deffinitely in the morning which doesn't surprize me, but I'm able to project at other times.

My initial thought on this is to collect a good years worth of data, compile it and review this with the AP board for beginners and experienced. I think by doing this it will at least lay a good fondation of framework for others and better help man/woman kind.

Tvos[/img]

[Tombo]

I'm interessted in that subject as well. Havent read the whoile thread yet. I like your "focus helps" that you describe, good idea!
I did some experiements in the past with mixed Results, very much like you guys describe. I plan to to do some more experiments in the future. The problem with words and numbers is that the perception often mixes them up

My last exp. was as follows:

My Girlfriend draw a butterfly on a paper and placed it on a table. I saw a twisted heart while APing whch I draw later. The 2 drawings were very close (basially same geometrical shape) but still no complete match. I would like to have a complete proof for me personal. But is gets frustrating quickly. So I don't do much of these experiments anymore. It is definitely not pure guessing, that I'm convinced.

[Kazbadan]

the voise of silence: your experiment was nice, but i think that scientists would say that the 8, even being similar to the 2 is not a good guess, or something like that. But it was a nice experiment at the same and u should continue with it.

About me, qbeac, i am not able to do OBEs, i have just done some spontaneous with no results (i couldnt see). I need to learn obes.

If i was a really good projector, i would be always trying such experiments until get a real proof (or not?).

[David Warner]

Kazbadan,

The important issue is that I was able to pick out the suit and not just so much the numbers - even though thats the icing on the cake. Don't get me wrong, I would love to have validation as well so I can rest on this issue. I find that if what Stephen Labarge discusses with numbers and shapes changing that its a lucid dream and that in my experiences they don't.. then it opens the door to more investigation.

Eventually, I would like to run a few video ip cameras in my house (when I can get the extra $$). I think it would be best to have one camera on my dogs leroy,kya, and casey and one where I'm resting. Video record the event and see if anything triggers from that.

So much experimenting to do!! but I don't want to get so caught up that I don't enjoy the fruits of the experience either. It takes A GREAT amount of energy to perform these tasks... but well worth the work.

Tvos

[qbeac]

Hello everybody, I have been refining a little bit the instructions of Agnostic Method and Table 1 with the different variants of it. I have included them in post 3 and 4 of this thread, so that everybody can easily find them. English is not my mother language, so, if you think the translation could be improved, please, fell free to do it (it won't offend me at all), just let me know and I'll change it in those posts.

In case you would like to include other options in Table 1, such as "3 ordered cards", there are at least two science forums that I know of which are the gathering places for professional mathematicians, and they could perform the calculations rather easily (that's routine for them). Here they are:

- Mathematics forum at 100cia.com:
http://100cia.com/opinion/foros/showthread.php?t=5303

- Mathematics forum at foro MIGUI:
http://foro.migui.com/phpbb/viewforum.php?f=2&sid=6bde630e800c56308bfb9a0d79c4b379

Please, do you know of any other good science forum in English?

I believe it would be a good idea to let them know about Agnostic Method, to see what they think about it. In my opinion, it is very important that the scientific community realizes there is already a scientific and very reliable method to verify if these types of experiences are real or imaginary.

Chao. qbeac.

[Kazbadan]

www.sciforums.com

thats not bad

Voice of Silence: keep with the good work and makes us know the results

[qbeac]

Hi everybody,
Hi Kazbadan, thanks a lot for the link to that Science forum, it looks pretty good. If anybody else knows of another similar Science forum (in English or Spanish), please, let us know. Thanks.

I have already placed a post in that English Science forum. Now let's see what English speaking scientists think about this experiment to verify if these type of experiences are real or imaginary. These are the links:

Scientific method to verify if OBE are real or imaginary experiences
http://www.sciforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=69

And this is the specific thread:
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=49410

Chao. qbeac.

[qbeac]

Hi everybody, PLEASE, HELP ME IN THE FOLLOWING ENGLISH SCIENCE FORUM!:

- SCIFORUM. Thread: Scientific method to verify if OBE are real or imaginary experiences
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=890456#post890456

Somebody has asked to move the post from the scientific section to the pseudo-scientific one, and, in my opinion, "it seems" that person simply has not taken the time to analyze this subject properly from a scientific point of view.

What we would like to ask for is for scientists to analyze this subject in depth, not with adjectives, but with scientific arguments, just as we have done in the Spanish Science forum (100cia.com). That's what we ask for!

Thanks. qbeac.

[magicmac2000]

qbeac: I see you are really really trying to find out whether these experiences are going on effectively out of the body or if they are mere Lucid Dreams It's very cool that people like you are seeking the truth behind all these. Now, I think it's a waste of your time to discuss the subject with pseudo-skeptic people. I mean, they are closed minded like orthodox religious or fundamentalists. You seem to be an open minded skeptic, like most of us who believe in OBEs but we want to find out the reality of these.
Now, the problem with these pseudo-skeptics is that they WANT these to be a simple hallucination and they don't analyze all the studies. You can give them 100 links with studies full of claims from people who had NDEs and studies (like the one made by Charles Tart) where one woman really saw the random number (5 digit) while out of body. I think that TVOS is "The Man" in this area. He is making good progress with his experiments but even if he give us proof, they won't believe what TVOS says...
Check out for example, the AfterLife-knowledge.com page. Bruce Moen has a lot of proof claiming that he had contacted deceased ones. Check out his forum, where a few guys could apply the same techniques and found out real information from deceased ones. Even with that information, we can end up thinking that they are lying, they are crazy or they are simply hallucinating
Just my opinion. Keep going, but don't waste your time with pseudo-skeptics.

Cheers,
Magic.

[David Warner]

when you think about it - this all comes down to is personal experiences and chasing after the objective - proof and validation. science has been trying to prove this for ages and are not able to obtain this because of the personal experience itself.  

i wouldn't say that i'm the one with experience and am the master in this area (far from it) - a hard worker and focused 24/7 yes - this is what it takes. mental-physical conditioning, and when i mean physical, i mean exercise, removing old habits, working out, running, keeping up with AP forum discussions, personal journal notes, tracking and much more.

Qbeac - its good to see that you are interested in astral projection and are conservative with your thoughts not to rush at judgment. i do think that in order to better understand it, you really need to experience.


tvos