Forwarded from Immortalis
Cavity Structural Effect Experiment #2
Paper Combs --- Cut apart 6 sheets of office paper lengthwise and fold each of them like a bellows so, that you get 10 edges and 20 planes on each. Squeeze the bellows so that the sheets are square now, rather then rectangular and glue them on top of one another, turning each consecutive sheet horizontally 30 degrees clockwise against the bottom one. Then glue together (preferably out of dark paper) a conical, multi-layered "flower" with a few dozen petals and fluff up the petals. Test the emanators by holding your palm above the "flower" and underneath the suspended bellows. Place the bellows and then the flower above the head of a sitting person and record his/her sensations.
Paper Combs --- Cut apart 6 sheets of office paper lengthwise and fold each of them like a bellows so, that you get 10 edges and 20 planes on each. Squeeze the bellows so that the sheets are square now, rather then rectangular and glue them on top of one another, turning each consecutive sheet horizontally 30 degrees clockwise against the bottom one. Then glue together (preferably out of dark paper) a conical, multi-layered "flower" with a few dozen petals and fluff up the petals. Test the emanators by holding your palm above the "flower" and underneath the suspended bellows. Place the bellows and then the flower above the head of a sitting person and record his/her sensations.
Forwarded from Immortalis
Cavity Structural Effect Experiment #3
Moving combs --- Make a wooden top and drill several holes about a pencil size through it.
Their CSE field perception significantly increases when the top is spinning. This is easily perceived by the palm of the hand and it is due to the fact that the cavities must be numerically multiplying in space.
Moving combs --- Make a wooden top and drill several holes about a pencil size through it.
Their CSE field perception significantly increases when the top is spinning. This is easily perceived by the palm of the hand and it is due to the fact that the cavities must be numerically multiplying in space.
SHAPE POWER - DAN DAVIDSON COLLECTION: https://mega.nz/folder/aRsU0K6K#4RDMqgbF1634efrMsvt2Hg
mega.nz
2.44 GB folder on MEGA
41 files and 4 subfolders
Aether Force Shop will be advertising many deal and products through this holiday season. All proceeds help this community and movement grow. Please check us out.
FB page for the Aether Force Shop: https://www.facebook.com/Aether-Force-Shop-249493843637286
The main Aether Force Shop Link: https://www.aetherforce.energy/aether-shop/
FB page for the Aether Force Shop: https://www.facebook.com/Aether-Force-Shop-249493843637286
The main Aether Force Shop Link: https://www.aetherforce.energy/aether-shop/
Facebook
Log in or sign up to view
See posts, photos and more on Facebook.
Forwarded from Immortalis
An Experimental Test of the Hypothesis of Formative Causation
The hypothesis of formative causation predicts that as animals of a given species learn a new pattern of behaviour, other similar animals will subsequently tend to learn the same thing more readily all over the world, a a result of a process called morphic resonance. The more that learn it, the easier it should become for others. This possibility was tested with day-old chicks using a simple learned response, a conditioned aversion. The test took place in the laboratory of Steven Rose, a sceptic, following a standard procedure used routinely in his laboratory, and was carried out blind by a summer student who knew nothing of the purpose of the experiment nor of morphic resonance. The chicks were exposed either to a test stimulus, a small yellow light-emitting diode (LED), or a control stimulus, a chrome bead. Half an hour after pecking the stimulus, the control chicks received an injection of saline solution, and the test chicks an injection of lithium chloride, which made them mildly sick. They were then tested three hours later, each chick being exposed sequentially to the control and the test stimulus, when most test birds were averse to pecking the yellow LED, but not averse to pecking the control bead. The response of the chicks was measured by recording the latency, the time delay in seconds before they first pecked the stimulus. The same experimental procedure was repeated for 37 days. If morphic resonance were occurring, successive batches of chicks should have shown an increasing aversion to the yellow LED, even in the initial training procedure, by morphic resonance from their averse predecessors. The controls should have shown no such increasing aversion. I think the results are consistent with such an effect, which shows up with a high degree of statistical significance (p < 0.01) when the aversion to the yellow bead is measured relative to the control. Rose disagrees with this interpretation.
shorturl.at/fgA23
https://www.sheldrake.org/research/morphic-resonance/an-experimental-test-of-the-hypothesis-of-formative-causation
The hypothesis of formative causation predicts that as animals of a given species learn a new pattern of behaviour, other similar animals will subsequently tend to learn the same thing more readily all over the world, a a result of a process called morphic resonance. The more that learn it, the easier it should become for others. This possibility was tested with day-old chicks using a simple learned response, a conditioned aversion. The test took place in the laboratory of Steven Rose, a sceptic, following a standard procedure used routinely in his laboratory, and was carried out blind by a summer student who knew nothing of the purpose of the experiment nor of morphic resonance. The chicks were exposed either to a test stimulus, a small yellow light-emitting diode (LED), or a control stimulus, a chrome bead. Half an hour after pecking the stimulus, the control chicks received an injection of saline solution, and the test chicks an injection of lithium chloride, which made them mildly sick. They were then tested three hours later, each chick being exposed sequentially to the control and the test stimulus, when most test birds were averse to pecking the yellow LED, but not averse to pecking the control bead. The response of the chicks was measured by recording the latency, the time delay in seconds before they first pecked the stimulus. The same experimental procedure was repeated for 37 days. If morphic resonance were occurring, successive batches of chicks should have shown an increasing aversion to the yellow LED, even in the initial training procedure, by morphic resonance from their averse predecessors. The controls should have shown no such increasing aversion. I think the results are consistent with such an effect, which shows up with a high degree of statistical significance (p < 0.01) when the aversion to the yellow bead is measured relative to the control. Rose disagrees with this interpretation.
shorturl.at/fgA23
https://www.sheldrake.org/research/morphic-resonance/an-experimental-test-of-the-hypothesis-of-formative-causation