|
|
|
|
I 6. Data Integration versus Meme Complexes versus Noise
Posted: November 15, 2003 Assuming correct integration is achieved prior to the session's end-point (such as S3 in the HRVG method), how dependable is the viewer's data from this point on, considering the basin of associations against which he/she now has to struggle? How can we balance context recognition against "meme complex identification"? Lyn Buchanan has suggested (in FAQs on P>S>I website) that a monitor, in this situation, should keep moving the viewer against unknown aspects of the target (see below) What about unmonitored sessions? Should the viewer focus on general aspects which fit easily in the overall context (but which, for that very reason, could be attributed to the mind "filling in the blanks") or on unusual, idiosyncratic aspects (which might be a significant signature of the target, but might also represent noise having nothing to do with the signal?
Replies / References See "Can The Viewer Ever Identify Things?" by PJ
Gaenir and Lyn Buchanan
Posted: November 15, 2003 The Essential Overlap Matrix: An Extension for a
Remote Viewing Tool Making a Stray Cat Prolific: Thesaural Imaging
and Remote Viewing Cassirer, on the Expressive Form of Mythopoetic
Thought: A Foundation for Buchanan's Concept of Ambiance
|
|
|