Alexey wrote >
Let me make a little bit of coming out. I practice magic for 21 years. And I think, that magic is literally practical application of MMI. We influence “quantum random processes” in world to get desired outcome. (See full message in Need Advice… thread) I think this topic is important enough to deserve its own thread:
It has been said, to paraphrase, “There are no supernatural laws, only natural ones,” and science fiction writer, Arthur C. Clarke said, “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” If we dispense with the Hollywood presentation, a simple description of Magic is, “producing an intended result without mediation of classical forces.” This is exactly the same as a simple description of MMI. These ideas only mean, it is possible to alter probabilities at a distance by an influence of mind alone.
We usually think of MMI as altering probabilities of microscopic events, such as in a true random number generator producing 1s or 0s. However, microscopic probabilities can be collectively altered in or around larger objects. If that happens, macroscopic or physically observable effects can occur.
“Empty” space is filled with virtual energies that are not directly observable in most cases. Energies in the quantum vacuum are usually random in their distribution, but under certain conditions these energies become more coherent and produce macroscopic forces that are clearly measurable. An example of such a force is the Casimir Effect. While I know of no evidence that MMI manifests through coherent (non-random) energies in the quantum vacuum, it is one of the possibilities.
Hi Alexey, Since you have studied and/or worked with magical systems for some time, I would like to ask a question.
Would you be willing to say in the simplest form what are the steps or conditions you have found to be the most successful in achieving your intended outcome? I would like to compare with what I have found for MMI experiments to see what features are the same.
I have experience with practices that don’t include an MMI generator, such as playing slot machines in a casino. This followed a lot of practice with the MindEnabled Trainer (ME Trainer) using just a pseudorandom generator as the entropy source. Getting a Hit or successful match as intended is very much like pressing the spin button on a slot machine and intending a win to result. When the spin button press is detected, the current state of the pseudorandom generator in the machine is read and the value is used in a lookup table to determine what the result of the spin will be. That is, lose or win and how much of a win. The feedback or outcome of a slot usually came within a few seconds but not as quickly as in the ME Trainer. My partner and I were able to shift the odds enough to just come out a little ahead in a very large number of spins as measured by total money out minus money in. Normally the slot machine would take about 7% on average for every bet, so the odds had to be shifted at least by 7%. That’s an effect size of about 14% – a really huge amount based only on practice and confidence it was possible from prior training and scoring on the ME Trainer.
Statistically, after only 73 spins the amount left should have been about 50 cents, just enough for one more spin. Since we both spun hundreds of times every visit, we should have been left with nothing almost every time. Winning at slot machines was never my desire – though it was entertaining. It just happened to be a totally objective and readily available measure of how well we could perform our magical exercise with MMI.
I can’t answer question in such form. Because I usually use different methods for different tasks.
If we talk about general opinion, I can tell some common conditions:
Inner synchronization. I don’t see will as monolith force, yet as process of emotional self-organization into complex psychic structure. So if you want to do occult manipulation, all your intents and emotions must be coherent and well balanced. And must be synchronized with your soul. With power, which influence entire world to make you exist.
Connection to source. I don’t believe in any kind of universal mana or energy, which allow us to perform miracles. All “psychic energy” which we have is energy of system entanglement. Information which able to change the world. We access that energy through our memory. So, if you want to alter future, you need memory about what granted you power to do so. Impressions about your meditation, from your initiation, memory of vibe from demon evocation, memory of ritual sacrifice of goat.
Combination of first and third perspective. If magic is ability to change macro world through inner work, you need to find, where first and third perspective are same thing.
Attenuation to target. You need to have essence of your target. Essence is substance which is source of their properties. If you have essence of something, you can predict properties and behavior of that thing. And if you have it, you can influence it. You can get it through causal involvement with your target and information about it.
Influence window. Some systems can be influenced with magic better than others with different forces. So you should choose method of your work according to properties of target.
As far as I understand, force of magic is applied to processes of organization and degradation. Solve and coagula, lol. So, it’s easier to influense systems, with big intensity of such processes. Living organisms, weather, social systems, mind of other people, liquid-solid phase transitions and so on.
Speaking about nature of MMI and magic, I don’t believe in supernatural. I think, that all that phenomena are based on laws on physics. Yet undiscovered ones.
Why I put in quotas “quantum random processes”, because I think, that it isn’t quite good point of view to describe how it works. As I understand reality, world is made of numbers(information). And time flow isn’t singular line. Time is multidimensional. We should think not about space-time continuum, but space-time-probability continuum. What we call wave function collapse is just event, when our light cone is driving away from numbers, which define wave function of local point of reality. That approach resembles one, which has been proposed by E. Verlinde. However, I can’t develop it better yet to make it into actual scientific theory.
So MMI doesn’t affect random numbers. It affects direction of time, where our reality go.
Also, it’s possible, that it isn’t mind matter interaction, yet life force matter interaction. Life is fire, which transfer memory. That fire produce force, which expanse substance into existence. So, it affects flow of time to expand carried memory into more directions of time, space and probability. Experiments with plant might be evidence in favor of that idea.
just to throw my 50c in here - as a magic practitioner as well as MMI afficionado. I disagree with your generalization of “magic” in general being MMI (or not). It really depends on the form and flavor of magic you are talking about. Could you be more precise what you mean?
Okay, I’ll say more precisely.
I think, that art of magic is possible because of several physical phenomena. And MMI, probably, one of core effects, which are needed to make magic work.
As I said above, probably, MMI is based on vital force manipulation. Which is needed to some degree for nearly every kind of magic work.
Of course, we can’t say, that art of magic and MMI effect are same thing. Because magic is art and science to alter macro world with inner work. And MMI is weird effect, that we can alter statistic of true random generators with our intention. But, as I understand, practical use of such effect is very distributed in operational magic.
I suggest when the simplest descriptions of magic and MMI are compared, the descriptions are the same. The basic principles are:
A user or practitioner desires – one may also say, intends – a specific outcome.
The user or practitioner expects the outcome will be achieved without the use of classical fields or forces, such as electromagnetic fields or direct physical force.
The user or practitioner expects the outcome will or may occur at a distance, that is, without direct mechanical contact.
On the other hand, There are examples that point out some specific differences between magic and MMI.
Sometimes the desired outcome is not entirely specific, then the desired outcome may be defined more generally. Some specific methods of magic, such as contact healing, may suggest or require physical contact. Some outcomes are more abstract and refer to conditions or states of being, so distance or contact are not relevant terms.
The title of the thread was meant as a starting point for discussion, not a statement of belief that magic and MMI are the literally the same thing. I also suggest that some occurrences of “magic” are examples of MMI and vice versa. It is clear, careful statements and definitions are beneficial to promote understanding, which are being brought out in this thread. This is very helpful and very interesting.
Magic isn’t MMI, because Magic is art and science(not very developed one). And MMI is (meta)physical effect, which is ,as it seems, widely used in that art.
There are pretty much of cases, when we use classical fields, but trying to buff them to make work more efficiently and successfully.
Basic common principle is that it doesn’t work without conscious operator.
Update. I forgot one, probably, most important thing.
6.Understanding. Understanding as magic operation is highly undervalued. However, every operation is much more effective if you understand in some form what you are doing. Big part of magic learning is forging of some form of understanding, which has potential to influence world. I’m not sure how much of every kind of occult model is corresponding to reality. But some forms of understaning your operation help you to perform it. Some doesn’t. And some are better than other.
It’s possible to use much different models for certain causes. Think about them as instruments made of thought.
Some people have strong beliefs and emotional reactions about the subject of magic. However, the more I study and work to understand the underpinnings of both MMI and Magic, the more I conclude they are fundamentally and actually the same.
There aren’t different principles or “laws” governing how mind interacts with or uses natural laws to achieve desired results, whether the user calls what they do MMI or A.C.E. or Magic. To be sure, there is a wide variety of methods and appearances, depending on what the practitioner has been taught and believes will produce the desired result.
I (presently) call the underlying science behind these processes, psycho mechanics to reflect the involvement of both mind and quantum mechanics. There are three parts to a basic psycho mechanical equation: 1) an idea or intention of a desired outcome held in mind, 2) the actual observation or measurement of the outcome, and 3) mind itself, acting as an entanglement witness (Entanglement witness - Wikipedia). An entanglement witness is a transform or operation that distinguishes between entangled (non-separable wavefunctions) and classical relationships. Mind both causes entanglement and allows it to be observed (witnessed). Note, the entanglement I mention is usually weak, meaning the probability of observing the intended outcome is fairly small. This may be just a matter of not knowing how to create the desired entanglement/outcome or how to properly observe it, but there may be some limitations within the principles involved when the effect becomes very pronounced.
I only wanted to mention the development of psycho mechanics, so this is just a minimal introduction.
I’d still say, that MMI and magic isn’t same. Even if supposedly magic widely use that force, which we called MMI. But we can’t say, that plumbing and Navier-stocks flow are same. Even if waterworks engineering is rooted in principles of hydrodynamics, we can’t say, that they are same.
Also, we can’t render ALL array of instruments of magic to MMI(as we know it) usage. Otherwise we could render all symbolism, sacred geometry, alchemy, spiritualism to be redundant and pointless. And I think, that’s not the case. There is more to that story, than influence on random processes with intention(or life force, in my opinion).
About entangled observer, I had similar thoughts before. However, now I have some different guesses. I think, that compressability of information is property, which alter physical properties and causal structure of vessel of that information. I could bring some publications, why do I think so.
Recent progress in AI shows peculiar thing, which we should think about. AI, learning to predict language, learning to mimic thought patterns and reasoning of humans. But what does AI actually does in learning process? Modern language models are basically advanced data compressors. Like g-zip. But adaptable and beefier.
So, we could say, that language has that peculiar property, that it directs adaptable compressing system to develop similarity to thought processes of source of language. Which make sense from POV of evolution. Because it help to ensure distribution of useful thought patterns across population. And to ensure preservation of own self in distributed memory to certain degree.
Also, it bears imprint of personality. Since language models, which are trained on messages of certain person, could replicate answers in psychological tests of that person with surprising precision.
So, if adaptable data compressor starts to mimic certain traits of speaker of that language and nature itself has some processes, which depends on compressability of information, it might mean, that some meaningful processes could be excitated in nature itself with sheer arrangement of information by rules of language. Because all ways to estimate compressability are bounded to attempts to compress and see, what happens with some shortcuts.
And it doesn’t necessary means, that it should be spoken or written language. Since there is hypothesis of language of thought. That all content of our mind are encoded by rules of some internal language, or array of languages. With own rules of syntax, grammar and vocabulary.
It’s beneficial for many different perspectives to be brought up and discussed. This can help us think of things we never considered.
I want to derive a model of mind that can be used as a guide for designing equipment that provides many useful and valuable applications. In addition, a sufficiently advanced model may allow ordinary people to learn to affect the probability of particular outcomes, using only their minds.
After 30 years now, my experience shows a user can learn by practice to substantially increase their hit rate in simple MMI tests. it’s also possible to learn how to influence probabilities in more ordinary situations, without using special equipment, though up to now learning seems best accomplished by using specially designed hardware and software that’s more convenient to practice with.
This image shows all my data taken during a 6 week intensive training period 9 years ago. The testing program did not allow data to be discarded during the study, which includes about 10,000 trials. Data was taken on 29 days of the 42-day training period.The black lines represent the linear curve fits of the data points. The changes during the training period are not subtle.
This is really fascinating, what do you think about some thought leaders claims like Dean Radin that there may be a significant genetic disposition that makes it easier or harder to use MMI/psi?
I haven’t seen the context of his statement, so I am missing information. I wonder what research Radin has to support his claim. It would be difficult – though not impossible – to gather enough genetic information coupled with MMI test results in the same subjects to draw statistically significant conclusions. This is especially true if the MMI results are based on the almost unresponsive MMI technology always used by PEAR and its associates.
Another though on this is, we should be careful about statements that could be taken as biased, in the same way that genetics (sex or race for example) is used to distinguish and downplay the abilities of certain groups or individuals. In any case, given the strong affect that training can have on MMI results, I suspect that environment, including teachings and cultural beliefs, is a more important factor than genetics on an individual’s MMI performance.
To be sure, a few individuals seemingly have innate abilities, just as in sports. They can be superstars from the beginning, but most people have to train and work hard to excel. I believe each person’s abilities can be improved with training, and their skill level will fall on a scale (PsiQ, if you will), similar to IQ. However, mental abilities can be significantly increased, while IQ mostly cannot. The analogy with IQ is important because the IQ that is measured with IQ tests is significantly biased by the design of the test and the cultural training of the test subject. This type of cultural bias is to be avoided in the design of PsiQ tests, which I believe don’t exist yet in a general form.
Genetics of psychic ability - A pilot case-control exome sequencing study
for context
I may have exaggerated that he actually claimed that there is a psychic gene, actually sounds like he thinks it may be likely there is a psi blocking gene, and sees it a viable path of experimentation
he did say that everyone can enhance their psi ability, so my original post was a bit of a mischaracterization
Either psi gene, or psi blocking genes are pretty much possible.
Connectom of brain is determined by genes. And, highly likely, different brain structures has different capablities to do something weird enough with information to alter reality.
However, I highly doubt, that there is only one gene, which has influence of that abilities. Most probable, that that’s entire group of genes.
Psi abilities depends on widely different way to process information, than regular cognition. Complete block of that pathway might be beneficial to survival too. Because, psi power isn’t reliable and strong enough to be better choice, than high intelligence and stability of mind to ensure survival. So, some population might have sacrificed that abilities to develop more efficient cognition.
Obviously, in best case, our brain should be able to maintain both pathways in separate systems. Or to flexibly, reliably and efficiently switch pathways at will. But evolution isn’t an engineer. And feature distance between our current brain structure and efficient psyonic might be remarkably high.
