Discussion:
Telepathy: the story of a synchronization, explained
(too old to reply)
Fabrizio J Bonsignore
2012-02-18 20:19:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I board the subway train and find in the car a meaningful character,
not the first time it happens, this time she is who seems to be the
stray daughter of MP and TA from primary school. Since we were applied
Islam and the Qu ran so the outcome has to be no females left in the
generation the encounter is meaningful but the girl already knows that
maybe her mother or aunt or both were tortured. It seems a very
miraculous event I ve been going through for a while but it is very
easily explainable as just solving a system of differential equations.
In this case, all that the mind that effected the synchronizations
needs to output as outcome is very simple: the time at which to wake
me up. All other variables are already known and standard, all _that_
mind has to know is the time the girl and her tutoress are boarding
the train to calculate at what time to wake me up for me to arrive at
the synchronization and all the control that mind has to have, very
likely an old woman interested in the issue, is (basically) to wake me
up in time. All other variables are known: the distance between the
place I was asleep in the terminal and the train, the distance between
the car and the subway entry, the pace at which I walk, the train
speed, the moment the couple entered the subway and boarded the train,
my route... All this forms a model of the world that is not completely
or truly conscious but unconscious, that mind does not have to know
the exact measurements in terms of meters or have measured the average
speed of subway lines at every moment, which is unwieldy, but the
brain is recording such facts as almost meaningless data constantly
and storing them so they are available to make formal calculus of
consistency and coherency that enable it to solve a differential
equation system the way numerical methods do, and arrive at a simple
quantity-control model it can effect.

It was already known, even obvious, that I had to be in the zone I was
going to at the time I had to be there. I was awaken _just in time_ to
decide it was not too late to move and be there in time. The control
variable was in this case a man who sit in front of me in the table I
had my head over my luggage and who pretended to make a phone call
then went away. If he had remained in place for longer, I would have
pretended I was still asleep and wait for him to leave, even fall into
slumber again; the moment the man stands up there is time enough to
see it is not to late but just in time, pick the luggage and leave, so
that there is no implicit assumption of social interaction, but that
is very basic and _automatic_ social understanding among Humans. If
both had stayed longer in the same table, it would seem we are
actually friends and sitting together when in fact he just took
advantage of the free chair while I was a socially distant and
disengaged figure. The mind that perform the operation just had to
enact a simple control: *contact* the man at the right moment for him
to engage in his conversation and wake me up. Such mind was most
likely aware of the position of the girl-woman couple when they
boarded and where they boarded the train, probably at a very nearby
station in a line that has very near stations. Then since I woke _just
in time_ to arrive to where I had planned, my next decision is to take
the shortest path to the train. Some minutes earlier I would have
taken a different path and even changed my plans; some minutes late
and I would have missed it completely and stayed in the place to fall
into slumber again. This calculus is also rather simple and very
likely standard (average) among Humans, the relationship between time
to travel, time of appointment, slack time to be late or early, the
probability to change plans at the last moment, etc., so not much
additional information is needed here.

I take the shortest path and am ready to go into the subway without
wasting time in lines, but that is also a known fact at this time of
the month, so in that respect I am quite predictable, all the
differential equations system still has to produce is the moment to
start my walking. The stairs down to the train are the closest to the
entry and straight into the line direction I have to travel; I come
off the stairs as the train is just arriving. At this point there is a
fifty-fifty chance the synchronization will fail as I can choose to
take either car, one leads to the girl, the other _might_ have
produced a different meaningful encounter as there is a blonde female
hairdo that calls my attention, but the girl s encounter is more
meaningful overall than some possible flirting.

The same kind of simple control as the man making a fake call to wake
me up just in time can be conceived for the train system,
particularly, since conductors (there are actually live conductors)
can receive telepathic signals. In fact, the train _was_ traveling
rather slowly, but on that end it is conceivable necessary ONLY to
have one person receiving the signal and **manipulating** the girl-
woman system in a standard way. Particularly, assuming the couple
entered the car next to the library, they naturally end in the car
that has the closest path from subway entry to same car, but THAT is
data that is also relatively simple for a mind that is implementing
automatic, numerical calculus to produce two points of control and one
one time variable, since in the end the subway system does have fixed
distance-time relationships. Other assumptions on this freer (more
degrees of freedom) end of the system to take into account when
monitoring the schedule of the girl-woman couple, would have only led
to a different time to wake me up... or to a total abandonement of the
**plan** to synchronize _this time_ and begin immediately the next
possible plan for synchronization. But it is assumed at the outset
that the mind that is _dedicated_ to solve this problem of solving a
system for minimum variable-minimum control under constraints and
fixed relationship data does have the advantage of being dually
(duplex) capturing the signal from at least two of the actors in the
synchronization and most likely of more than two actors, which in this
case instead of adding complexity to the computation can actually
diminish its complexity in several ways, just by adding more fixed
elements to control the situation.

The unconscious mind can then act in parallel in different subsystems
to solve the different elements in the system, but in essence it can
solve the problem just be RECEIVING and EMITTING a signal
independently of its content to the different, in this case two points
of control (or maybe three, the conductor), and in real time perform
any adjustments necessary. All this effort can be done automatically
in parallel by a massively connected computing process with very
little conscious effort for a mind that is already obssessed
(dedicated) to the problem of connecting people with me. I think it is
an old woman s mind for whom additionally the problem of connecting
people and *finding the girl* is already structural.

So it can be seen that it is not a big problem, as has been the
possibilitating thesis since the beginning, to perform synchronization
even among parties that are not directly connected, as stream of
meaning, to the **central processor**, not even as signal reception,
as long as there are enough points of control (direct schizophrenics)
and monitoring capabilities (carrying fields) to provide information
over a fixed set of structural relationships like a city and the
subway offer. In other times in the fields it would have been simpler
probably though instead of personal synchronizations the outcome was
mobs, ordered mobs, **commercial** movements, sagas, cities... needing
only a few carrying fields, their control points and dually connected
central processors...

Danilo J Bonsignore
Fabrizio J Bonsignore
2012-02-18 20:27:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
...

Danilo J Bonsignore
Fabrizio J Bonsignore
2012-02-18 20:49:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
One basic assumption for this model to work is that the mind
performing the synchronization DOES have a correct understanding/model
of how the telepathic-schizophrenic channels work.

Danilo J Bonsignore
Benj
2012-02-18 22:24:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fabrizio J Bonsignore
One basic assumption for this model to work is that the mind
performing the synchronization DOES have a correct understanding/model
of how the telepathic-schizophrenic channels work.
Danilo J Bonsignore
I'd say that one "possibilitating thesis" for this post is that you
are a moron who like so many here, think that incomprehensible word
salads can fool people into thinking you are so smart that nobody can
understand you!

You are not. We can see just what you are.

Idiot.
Tonico
2012-02-19 11:55:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fabrizio J Bonsignore
One basic assumption for this model to work is that the mind
performing the synchronization DOES have a correct understanding/model
of how the telepathic-schizophrenic channels work.
Danilo J Bonsignore
Idiot
tony fleming
2012-02-19 12:15:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fabrizio J Bonsignore
One basic assumption for this model to work is that the mind
performing the synchronization DOES have a correct understanding/model
of how the telepathic-schizophrenic channels work.
Danilo J Bonsignore
Idiot
yeah i read those words too. so? what do they mean? come on, YOU
explain seeing as you know and I dontt!!
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore syntotic
2013-02-05 09:46:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Tchk, tchk, tchk... Say that the MIND performing the synchronization is the one getting ALL INPUTS, processing, then OUTPUTING. Like a math function if you like. Now say that such mind DOES BELIEVE that input comes from The Gods (plural). The MIND may be addicted to god 1 but enemy of god 2... THEN, it will doubly consider what it thinks comes from god 1, and reject what it thinks comes from god 2. In a mathematical function you INPUT all inputs! But in a god worldview, LITERALLY, you will leave some variables without value (god 2) and others doubled (god 1). Whatever comes from as OUTPUT will be WRONG! Say, god 1 means RIGHT DIRECTION, god 2 means LEFT DIRECTION. A god worldview will tell you ALWAYS to go TO THE RIGHT and a double distance! But a correct view of the world will be able to... probably you have to go to the left a little bit only. The consequence (to be proven) is that if you tell all people HOW to workout the CORRECT MODEL of the world, THESE statements in this thread will always be true! Otherwise, for some people there will be meaning in this words, for the others these are just babbling because they are in contact with minds with wrong worldviews.

SO, since I provided a correct model of the world, such MIND can deliver these meaningful synchronizations and symbolisms. For other people such MINDs will be unfathomable.
Post by tony fleming
Post by Fabrizio J Bonsignore
One basic assumption for this model to work is that the mind
performing the synchronization DOES have a correct understanding/model
of how the telepathic-schizophrenic channels work.
Danilo J Bonsignore
Idiot
yeah i read those words too. so? what do they mean? come on, YOU
explain seeing as you know and I dontt!!
Would be SO EASY to turn this BACK to a right model of the usenet...


Danilo J Bonsignore
tony fleming
2012-02-19 11:41:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fabrizio J Bonsignore
I board the subway train and find in the car a meaningful character,
not the first time it happens, this time she is who seems to be the
stray daughter of MP and TA from primary school. Since we were applied
Islam and the Qu ran so the outcome has to be no females left in the
generation the encounter is meaningful but the girl already knows that
maybe her mother or aunt or both were tortured. It seems a very
miraculous event I ve been going through for a while but it is very
easily explainable as just solving a system of differential equations.
In this case, all that the mind that effected the synchronizations
needs to output as outcome is very simple: the time at which to wake
me up. All other variables are already known and standard, all _that_
mind has to know is the time the girl and her tutoress are boarding
the train to calculate at what time to wake me up for me to arrive at
the synchronization and all the control that mind has to have, very
likely an old woman interested in the issue, is (basically) to wake me
up in time. All other variables are known: the distance between the
place I was asleep in the terminal and the train, the distance between
the car and the subway entry, the pace at which I walk, the train
speed, the moment the couple entered the subway and boarded the train,
my route... All this forms a model of the world that is not completely
or truly conscious but unconscious, that mind does not have to know
the exact measurements in terms of meters or have measured the average
speed of subway lines at every moment, which is unwieldy, but the
brain is recording such facts as almost meaningless data constantly
and storing them so they are available to make formal calculus of
consistency and coherency that enable it to solve a differential
equation system the way numerical methods do, and arrive at a simple
quantity-control model it can effect.
It was already known, even obvious, that I had to be in the zone I was
going to at the time I had to be there. I was awaken _just in time_ to
decide it was not too late to move and be there in time. The control
variable was in this case a man who sit in front of me in the table I
had my head over my luggage and who pretended to make a phone call
then went away. If he had remained in place for longer, I would have
pretended I was still asleep and wait for him to leave, even fall into
slumber again; the moment the man stands up there is time enough to
see it is not to late but just in time, pick the luggage and leave, so
that there is no implicit assumption of social interaction, but that
is very basic and _automatic_ social understanding among Humans. If
both had stayed longer in the same table, it would seem we are
actually friends and sitting together when in fact he just took
advantage of the free chair while I was a socially distant and
disengaged figure. The mind that perform the operation just had to
enact a simple control: *contact* the man at the right moment for him
to engage in his conversation and wake me up. Such mind was most
likely aware of the position of the girl-woman couple when they
boarded and where they boarded the train, probably at a very nearby
station in a line that has very near stations. Then since I woke _just
in time_ to arrive to where I had planned, my next decision is to take
the shortest path to the train. Some minutes earlier I would have
taken a different path and even changed my plans; some minutes late
and I would have missed it completely and stayed in the place to fall
into slumber again. This calculus is also rather simple and very
likely standard (average) among Humans, the relationship between time
to travel, time of appointment, slack time to be late or early, the
probability to change plans at the last moment, etc., so not much
additional information is needed here.
I take the shortest path and am ready to go into the subway without
wasting time in lines, but that is also a known fact at this time of
the month, so in that respect I am quite predictable, all the
differential equations system still has to produce is the moment to
start my walking. The stairs down to the train are the closest to the
entry and straight into the line direction I have to travel; I come
off the stairs as the train is just arriving. At this point there is a
fifty-fifty chance the synchronization will fail as I can choose to
take either car, one leads to the girl, the other _might_ have
produced a different meaningful encounter as there is a blonde female
hairdo that calls my attention, but the girl s encounter is more
meaningful overall than some possible flirting.
The same kind of simple control as the man making a fake call to wake
me up just in time can be conceived for the train system,
particularly, since conductors (there are actually live conductors)
can receive telepathic signals. In fact, the train _was_ traveling
rather slowly, but on that end it is conceivable necessary ONLY to
have one person receiving the signal and **manipulating** the girl-
woman system in a standard way. Particularly, assuming the couple
entered the car next to the library, they naturally end in the car
that has the closest path from subway entry to same car, but THAT is
data that is also relatively simple for a mind that is implementing
automatic, numerical calculus to produce two points of control and one
one time variable, since in the end the subway system does have fixed
distance-time relationships. Other assumptions on this freer (more
degrees of freedom) end of the system to take into account when
monitoring the schedule of the girl-woman couple, would have only led
to a different time to wake me up... or to a total abandonement of the
**plan** to synchronize _this time_ and begin immediately the next
possible plan for synchronization. But it is assumed at the outset
that the mind that is _dedicated_ to solve this problem of solving a
system for minimum variable-minimum control under constraints and
fixed relationship data does have the advantage of being dually
(duplex) capturing the signal from at least two of the actors in the
synchronization and most likely of more than two actors, which in this
case instead of adding complexity to the computation can actually
diminish its complexity in several ways, just by adding more fixed
elements to control the situation.
The unconscious mind can then act in parallel in different subsystems
to solve the different elements in the system, but in essence it can
solve the problem just be RECEIVING and EMITTING a signal
independently of its content to the different, in this case two points
of control (or maybe three, the conductor), and in real time perform
any adjustments necessary. All this effort can be done automatically
in parallel by a massively connected computing process with very
little conscious effort for a mind that is already obssessed
(dedicated) to the problem of connecting people with me. I think it is
an old woman s mind for whom additionally the problem of connecting
people and *finding the girl* is already structural.
So it can be seen that it is not a big problem, as has been the
possibilitating thesis since the beginning, to perform synchronization
even among parties that are not directly connected, as stream of
meaning, to the **central processor**, not even as signal reception,
as long as there are enough points of control (direct schizophrenics)
and monitoring capabilities (carrying fields) to provide information
over a fixed set of structural relationships like a city and the
subway offer. In other times in the fields it would have been simpler
probably though instead of personal synchronizations the outcome was
mobs, ordered mobs, **commercial** movements, sagas, cities... needing
only a few carrying fields, their control points and dually connected
central processors...
Danilo J Bonsignore
Hi Danilo you are talking about 'connection' as in telepathy. focus
just on this. what are you saying precisely. and where does
'schizophrenia' and 'fields' come into it?

Tony
Fabrizio J Bonsignore
2012-02-22 05:41:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hi Danilo you are talking about 'connection' as intelepathy.  focus
just on this. what are you saying precisely. and where does
'schizophrenia' and 'fields' come into it?
Uh... I have like one third gigabyte text on the theme. This is only a
highlight. In fact, it seems to be pure electromagnetic theory
intermixed with computing theory. Nothing otherworldly actually. The
thesis is still: the problem of discerning the Human meaningful
information from residual activity of the Human brain is nonexistent
given the computing power of the Human brain. It is a no problem per
se. Then... etc.

Danilo J Bonsignore
vtcapo
2012-02-22 14:38:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fabrizio J Bonsignore
Hi Danilo you are talking about 'connection' as intelepathy.  focus
just on this. what are you saying precisely. and where does
'schizophrenia' and 'fields' come into it?
Uh... I have like one third gigabyte text on the theme. This is only a
highlight. In fact, it seems to be pure electromagnetic theory
intermixed with computing theory. Nothing otherworldly actually. The
thesis is still: the problem of discerning the Human meaningful
information from residual activity of the Human brain is nonexistent
given the computing power of the Human brain. It is a no problem per
se. Then... etc.
Danilo J Bonsignore
Dear Fabrizio,
Please apply your mathematic to the following events. I have a number
of people who would like an answer other than it being otherworldly.

This event was the result of a first encounter with a psychic. He was
lecturing in an upper floor meeting hall 
in and old building in NYC .
The room was filled with rows of fold up 
chairs 75-100 facing a
raised platform with a podium. An effeminate 
man in his mid thirties
dressed impeccable in a suit and tie walked in 
from a side door
accompanied by an assistant.

When I arrived he was about to commence with a lecture on 
numerology
and the significance of the number 3. I hurried to take my seat
never saying a word and listened. After the lecture was finished
there was a 
short break and you could feel the anticipation in the
packed house as they 
knew what was to happen next. During the break
idle conversations were heard. I listened and did not speak.

When he returned from an adjoining room he walked up to the first row
and in semi-trance began to tell each person seated, one by one what
was coming up next in their lives. This was absolutely meaningless
to 
me but by the expressions on peoples faces, intriguing. Row after
row 
would leave after they got their personal reading with only a
few 
staying on to watch it all.

When he finally got to me he pointed at me with closed eyes and said,
I see an older women who is upset with you. She is upset over your
work. You will have a “to do”, “words” over your …. Job. He
turned 
as if to go on to the next person when something drew him back
to me. 
Pointing once again to me, he said, and I see this women upset
over 
another women who is much older than her. He paused as if he
was 
seeing something…..She fell and broke her arm. That was it .

Around 10:00 or 11:00 PM. that same evening the phone rings, it is my
mother. She goes off on a rant over the fact that I was quitting my
job. Ira, my boss gave her an ear full saying I was leaving him in a
lurch and my mother of course sided with him and was reprimanding me
about my decision to quit. But that is not what raised the hairs on
the back of my neck. I was about to end the conversation when my
mother blurts out… and give your grandmother a call. She slipped on
the 
ice, and broke her wrist.

How would you account for the accuracy of the psychics cold reading
mathematically? This in not a trick question but an actual event. I
must stress that I had not spoken before or during the reading and had
no prior knowledge of my grandmother’s accident.

Richard Travisano
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore syntotic
2012-02-28 05:20:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
It is a lot of people implied in your story... But it is quite clear
your psychic is schizophrenic, you are a carrying field and some
people in the room were acting as anthena for him to *hear* something
about YOU. Once he *hears* something he tries to find out WHO IS
TALKING. He may be committing an identification mistake with genders
or is already adjusting, though discussing about numerology is not
exactly being very well adjusted unless it is demitifying it...
Basically you are not providing complete information... exact words
and phrases are important to see what he heard. Nor relative times
either... You mean the slip had already happened? When? Because if you
are told about an accident, think of it and the idea is transmitted,
others *hearing* are prone to CAUSE IT, just to comply. If the
accident had already occurred... he would be hearing the bounced
signal on YOU, or reflected on other people in the room. But it may be
he did **cause** it just by telling you! That at the end of the
conversation it was **blurted out** about the accident... can it be
faked for a while? Because it says that your interlocutor was also
*hearing* and was _reminded_. This is not a consultory! With enough
information we may be able to forecast which persons are proner to
hear voices and to hear of each other and how many are prone to go
into cline phenomena where one **version** will follow another in the
eyes of someone, or who will accumulate people, etc. You did not speak
of distances, phone calls may be to the next building or another
country, but I think the psychic was actually tring to locate someone
in the place.
Post by vtcapo
Dear Fabrizio,
Please apply your mathematic to the following events. I have a number
of people who would like an answer other than it being otherworldly.
Exactly what idea you have of mathematics? How many had an expression
in their faces and how many were just void? Then use common
statistics. Do you have pictures of faces and other data? Then we
might apply an equilibrium model to see how such particular system of
people would evolve, who would find whom again, who might follow
others, etc. Do you have a sociograph for the people implied? Then we
may identify other patterns and predict how they will evolve.
EVERYTHING in this theme is precisely saying it is NOT OTHERWORDLY. I
have not calculated it yet but a quick assessment once gave me over
720 different types of base schizophrenia. Which can then be ordered
in standard patterns of two to five people. And a few common themes...
before addressing other matters. Math has many faces actually, and one
of them is computing...

The girl I referred to may be a relative of MP and TA but also be
relative of PC (school mates). Some mathematics can justify to say
that some MP flew in TA with a PC and that was the message and
intention of the encounter! This is how Holmes in Doyle s thrillers
reasons and how some very schizophrenic brains DO communicate. A math
model can tells us what chances are there of this interpretation to be
real or spureous, how much information was needed to produce it and
other such characteristics for a general model, though in this thread
the point was to show that such encounters can be produced with
minimum points of control. I can _choose_ to investigate if any MP
used TA (or TWA) to fly with a PC (probably stolen) within such time
interval... or just let it be, and THAT is sanity indeed.

What did you expect to obtain with math? The psychic may not be
dangerous acting like this, but may be very dangerous if he keeps
informing of what he is not sure but CAN be produced through
mechanisms such as the self fulfilled prophecies, but mind that since
some people want to hide, uh, their condition, frauds are very common
and profitable for the real schizophrenics...

Danilo J Bonsignore
vtcapo
2012-02-28 14:19:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Feb 28, 12:20 am, "Fabrizio J. Bonsignore syntotic"
Post by Fabrizio J. Bonsignore syntotic
It is a lot of people implied in your story... But it is quite clear
your psychic is schizophrenic, you are a carrying field and some
people in the room were acting as anthena for him to *hear* something
about YOU. Once he *hears* something he tries to find out WHO IS
TALKING. He may be committing an identification mistake with genders
or is already adjusting, though discussing about numerology is not
exactly being very well adjusted unless it is demitifying it...
Basically you are not providing complete information... exact words
and phrases are important to see what he heard. Nor relative times
either... You mean the slip had already happened? When? Because if you
are told about an accident, think of it and the idea is transmitted,
others *hearing* are prone to CAUSE IT, just to comply. If the
accident had already occurred... he would be hearing the bounced
signal on YOU, or reflected on other people in the room. But it may be
he did **cause** it just by telling you! That at the end of the
conversation it was **blurted out** about the accident... can it be
faked for a while? Because it says that your interlocutor was also
*hearing* and was _reminded_. This is not a consultory! With enough
information we may be able to forecast which persons are proner to
hear voices and to hear of each other and how many are prone to go
into cline phenomena where one **version** will follow another in the
eyes of someone, or who will accumulate people, etc. You did not speak
of distances, phone calls may be to the next building or another
country, but I think the psychic was actually tring to locate someone
in the place.
Post by vtcapo
Dear Fabrizio,
Please apply your mathematic to the following events. I have a number
of people who would like an answer other than it being otherworldly.
Exactly what idea you have of mathematics? How many had an expression
in their faces and how many were just void? Then use common
statistics. Do you have pictures of faces and other data? Then we
might apply an equilibrium model to see how such particular system of
people would evolve, who would find whom again, who might follow
others, etc. Do you have a sociograph for the people implied? Then we
may identify other patterns and predict how they will evolve.
EVERYTHING in this theme is precisely saying it is NOT OTHERWORDLY. I
have not calculated it yet but a quick assessment once gave me over
720 different types of base schizophrenia. Which can then be ordered
in standard patterns of two to five people. And a few common themes...
before addressing other matters. Math has many faces actually, and one
of them is computing...
The girl I referred to may be a relative of MP and TA but also be
relative of PC (school mates). Some mathematics can justify to say
that some MP flew in TA with a PC and that was the message and
intention of the encounter! This is how Holmes in Doyle s thrillers
reasons and how some very schizophrenic brains DO communicate. A math
model can tells us what chances are there of this interpretation to be
real or spureous, how much information was needed to produce it and
other such characteristics for a general model, though in this thread
the point was to show that such encounters can be produced with
minimum points of control. I can _choose_ to investigate if any MP
used TA (or TWA) to fly with a PC (probably stolen) within such time
interval... or just let it be, and THAT is sanity indeed.
What did you expect to obtain with math? The psychic may not be
dangerous acting like this, but may be very dangerous if he keeps
informing of what he is not sure but CAN be produced through
mechanisms such as the self fulfilled prophecies, but mind that since
some people want to hide, uh, their condition, frauds are very common
and profitable for the real schizophrenics...
Danilo J Bonsignore
Danilo, your analysis of the events I witnessed is no surprise.
However, if people read my description of the events they know that
your exercise in paradigm preservation was way off the mark. Let’s
analyze what you said. Of course you have to take that blind leap of
faith in believing that everything I said was as they occurred.
Post by Fabrizio J. Bonsignore syntotic
But it is quite clear your psychic is schizophrenic, you
are a carrying field and some people in the room were
acting as antenna for him to *hear* something about YOU.
Once he *hears* something he tries to find out WHO IS
TALKING.
Schizophrenic? Show me your degree in Psychology and then you have the
right to make that accusation. You would be wrong, but at least you
would have some credentials to back up your spurious claim.

I am acting as a field and some in the room were acting as antenna for
him to hear something about YOU? I can understand the reasoning for
this. Known cons have used hidden mics and cameras where the audience
would gather. They would have their assistants correlate the
information and then do their magic. Remember, this is 1972, mics
maybe, TV no. But even if he used both they wouldn’t apply in my
case.


If you would have taken the time to read what I said thoroughly, you
would have read that in the 1st incident our group arrived just before
he was ready to deliver his lecture on numerology. We hurriedly found
our seats and sat down. Not a word except for an, excuse me as I found
my seat.

When he finished his lecture I went to the bathroom and then returned
to my seat. Others were milling about talking and those in our group
who had been there before primed me for what was to come up next. Not
once was there ever a word spoken concerning me quitting my job. The
slip and fall concerning my grandmother obviously happened just prior
to his readings and I was not privy to that information until I
received the phone call late that very same evening. No self
fulfilling prophecy there as you suggest.

This also applies to the 2nd incident. No talk about Rogers old truck
and how many miles he had on it. You are reaching. You know that and
so does anyone else with marginal reading skills.

Frankly speaking there is no way any mathematician can calculate the
odds of him predicting these two events happening in EXACTLY the way
he described. You may have convinced yourself but you will have a hard
time convincing others with the irrational mumbo jumbo you tried to
push off as authoritative. In essence, everything in your first two
paragraphs DOES NOT apply.

What you have actually done was once again convince me that science
has no explanation for both the 1st and 2nd incidents. Ockham’s Razor
suggests that from among competing hypotheses, selecting the one that
makes the fewest new assumptions usually provides the correct one, and
that the simplest explanation will be the most plausible until
evidence is presented to prove it false.

The psychic’s explanation certainly holds more water than the word
sieve you handed me. Well how to you like that? That’s a first.
Ockham’s Razor supporting a psychic. Where’s Guinness when you need
him?

RT
PS Danilo and all you multiple degreed mathematicians out there, lend
me you ears. The fact that the US government and the Soviet Union
engaged in psychic research was not because of some whim of the
imagination. They know that people like the psychic I mentioned exist
and wanted to exploit them for obvious reasons. It may not have the
attention it received back in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s but it is still
part of our defense budget buried in black ops. And I am sure that’s
exactly the way they like it. The big problem for the MIC (military
industrial complex) is that the psychics and remote viewers are seeing
“probable futures” and these futures are always in flux and can be
changed. Reliability has always been an issue because of this fact.

You want to know why Israel is using the Bible Code? It provides them
with a leg up so to speak concerning the future. If you know what
the probable futures are, you can prepare for any eventually. The
Jews are not stupid. They are running Codes day and night. Because to
them, it is a matter of life and death…
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore syntotic
2012-03-16 01:01:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
What are they playing at? It is the model I am talking about only not
formalized, only formalized with another name.

Danilo J Bonsignore
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore syntotic
2012-04-23 14:19:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by vtcapo
Schizophrenic? Show me your degree in Psychology and then you have the
right to make that accusation. You would be wrong, but at least you
would have some credentials to back up your spurious claim.
Reverse it, they have to show me THEIR degree that they studied my
framework, or their credentials is just a bunch of strangers who were
paid to rebuf if needed. But I have to thank NYC for providing me this
WONDERFUL chance to live, enjoy, first-third degree encounter with all
kinds of aberrants, perverts, deviants, criminals, terminal cases,
mental cases, psychopaths, sychophants (too), chronically diseased,
crazies, lobotomes, criminal bosses, criminals, lunatics, terrorists,
guerrillas, sectarians, Muslims, fanatics, torturers, Homeless,
Africans, Chinese, Hindi, Arabs, Indians, shamans and other such
individuals, and be totally unable to GET OUT. Hence these analysis.
Post by vtcapo
I am acting as a field and some in the room were acting as antenna for
him to hear something about YOU? I can understand the reasoning for
this. Known cons have used hidden mics and cameras where the audience
would gather. They would have their assistants correlate the
information and then do their magic. Remember, this is 1972, mics
maybe, TV no. But even if he used both they wouldn’t apply in my
case.
More or less. The phenomenon has been documented throughout History.
EEGs are an expression of that field, so we know that. The brain is
much more sensitive computer to pick up and gather such signals.
Antenna is a more complex concept, but think that it is more likely
you will prepare a speech for your girlfriend rather than for the
Pope! So if your girlfriend is around someone and within a field, she
is antenna and the schizophrenic would hear you. And yes, about me,
this is not a 5th world province, it was supposedly the capital of the
world, diplomacy, finances and media! I did initiate certain contacts.
Plus other conditions.
Post by vtcapo
If you would have taken the time to read what I said thoroughly, you
would have read that in the 1st incident our group arrived just before
he was ready to deliver his lecture on numerology. We hurriedly found
our seats and sat down. Not a word except for an, excuse me as I found
my seat.
When he finished his lecture I went to the bathroom and then returned
to my seat. Others were milling about talking and those in our group
who had been there before primed me for what was to come up next. Not
once was there ever a word spoken concerning me quitting my job. The
slip and fall concerning my grandmother obviously happened just prior
to his readings and I was not privy to that information until I
received the phone call late that very same evening. No self
fulfilling prophecy there as you suggest.
As I said at the beginning: the informative content is almost null.
Lots of data, but little information (not here to explain). All people
have job trouble, so mention job... and bingo.

You are implying the group was conspired to convince you! Did you pay
any more money? But you do believe he was right.

Self fulfilling prophecies abound. When did you DECIDE to go to the
place?
Post by vtcapo
This also applies to the 2nd incident. No talk about Rogers old truck
and how many miles he had on it. You are reaching. You know that and
so does anyone else with marginal reading skills.
Frankly speaking there is no way any mathematician can calculate the
odds of him predicting these two events happening in EXACTLY the way
(there are some surprising probability distributions, actually...)
Post by vtcapo
he described. You may have convinced yourself but you will have a hard
time convincing others with the irrational mumbo jumbo you tried to
push off as authoritative. In essence, everything in your first two
paragraphs DOES NOT apply.
Oh, it is in there, it is a framework, and it is formal models. You
CAN speak of number pi without reaching nth decimals, for instance. No
opinion, but I found too many who want it a secret and unexplained.
Think of a criminal who is being *heard* (for real, not delusionally):
he prefers people to think they engage in criminal thoughts rather
than act and find HIM.
Post by vtcapo
What you have actually done was once again convince me that science
has no explanation for both the 1st and 2nd incidents. Ockham’s Razor
suggests that from among competing hypotheses, selecting the one that
It is no assumption, it is axiom and observations, plus some easy
experiments. THIS is the simplest explanation. It is no coincidence
that psychiatrists DO speak of ANALYSIS and were called ANALYSTS,
simple pieces to form complex situations. My analysis is still going
on.
Post by vtcapo
The psychic’s explanation certainly holds more water than the word
sieve you handed me. Well how to you like that? That’s a first.
Ockham’s Razor supporting a psychic. Where’s Guinness when you need
him?
Guiness? Trodding the street dressed as a homeless garbage man after I
sent an email, making it evident that he could resemble to confusion
(cline) one (or more) of my aunts in the same condition. And I am
still complaining. Truly.

I think your post and reply are still self inconsistent. Try a truth
table...

The Bible is a PLAN. Actually it is one of a few possible outcomes
from a type of processes, the ones described by my framework (in
process...). The Qu ran is another one, same elements, different
outcome, same structure. Think of it as finding the complex roots of a
polynomial, you can read an introductory text. The conclusion is that
religion is an information transmission error and all religious
phenomena can be reduced to it. But that is already an advanced
consequence of all this and some lacunae have yet to be filled in and
precised before reaching the engineering.

Danilo J Bonsignore
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore syntotic
2012-05-22 21:30:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Assume you have a schizophrenic who hears everything I think
(internally), the whole time. When would he speak? When I speak, of
course. He would speak what I say when I speak and he would be called
a medium. Now assume somebody else is ALSO hearing the same thought
course but is not subject to it. If I am writing, *speaking*, the
second schizophrenic may be under the impression that the first
schizophrenic is **thinking**, and probably speaking... and I am the
medium writing or taking dictation!!! It is a fallacy.

So now assume that while writing I commit a typo, like when the caret
JUMPS over the place where the cursor is on in a browser edit text
box. In a computer I can correct a typo through a rather complex
combination of key strokes and reposition the caret. Such correction
implies a lot of visual observation; the caret is very implicit except
when having to reposition to correct a typo. What happens to the
**text** discourse? It stops! I have to stop my thought to correct the
typo and the linked medium... if he was dictating, did he forced the
typo? No! He would just keep dictating! But it is an illusion that he
is dictating, an illusion to both schizophrenics who are *hearing* the
author writing. Then the **dictating medium** would have to STOP its
dictation and wait for the typo correction and continue thereon...
rather mechanically! That is a contradiction! Now the driving medium
is under control of the typist committing typos!

The channel is thin. It does not admit a lot of throughput. In order
for a totally steady and unmoving, **thinking-only** mind, it would
need to transmit to the drone even the typing muscular orders! And
keep track of the implicit caret... and receive feedback on the
position of the cursor to make corrections when the cursor makes the
caret jump in this internet explorer. We cannot achieve that even in
remote computer sessions! It would require AT LEAST to be there a
SINGLE source, because if someone else is also transmitting... the
signal might cross.

This is more true for a long text. The medium would have to be a
perfect carcass under control of the active writer. Which violates the
second schizophrenic wrong inference that the immobile schizophrenic
medium is the one who is **thinking**.

At each typo the thinking mind stops the discourse to make the
corrections. If there was a dictating mind it would have to STOP with
a lag: some material just after the typo was discovered. THEN it would
have to repeat the text so that the typoing typist can get the
continuation! Then there is at least some separation between both
minds and more contradictions follow. Again it is a delusion of the
second schizophrenic that because it *hears*, the writer is NOT the
driving mind.

Of course there can be simultaneous texts, one original author writing
and a drone schizophrenic less than a medium taking dictation. But
then typos would have to be simultaneous and synchronized too! So even
the **dictated** schizophrenic would have to be independent to some
measure to correct its OWN typos. And it would stop hearing while he
corrects his OWN typo. And has to wait til the original author
corrects its typo. This becomes worse when intercalating text or doing
other computer related operations. Note that verbal speech, spoken or
written, is different from **mouse-CUA speech**. There is no guarantee
that both transmit nor that both transmit at the same rate nor that
both can be recognized by the drone schizophrenic. The drone
schizophrenic would be plagiarizing and he knows it. We developed
writing, computers and maybe even caret-cursor jumps to make the
distinction EVIDENT. Or we might lose the author to a drone s
dictation product.

I was truly bad at dictation in school. Only now after decades I can
write profficiently without watching (much) the keyboard.

Now consider very inner decisions to select capital letters or other
second layer text symbols... Or quick decisions to change word
order... Or window swaps... Same conclusions follow.

Danilo J Bonsignore
Fabrizio J. Bonsignore syntotic
2013-02-05 09:53:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by vtcapo
On Feb 28, 12:20 am, "Fabrizio J. Bonsignore syntotic"
Post by Fabrizio J. Bonsignore syntotic
It is a lot of people implied in your story... But it is quite clear
your psychic is schizophrenic, you are a carrying field and some
people in the room were acting as anthena for him to *hear* something
about YOU. Once he *hears* something he tries to find out WHO IS
TALKING. He may be committing an identification mistake with genders
or is already adjusting, though discussing about numerology is not
exactly being very well adjusted unless it is demitifying it...
Basically you are not providing complete information... exact words
and phrases are important to see what he heard. Nor relative times
either... You mean the slip had already happened? When? Because if you
are told about an accident, think of it and the idea is transmitted,
others *hearing* are prone to CAUSE IT, just to comply. If the
accident had already occurred... he would be hearing the bounced
signal on YOU, or reflected on other people in the room. But it may be
he did **cause** it just by telling you! That at the end of the
conversation it was **blurted out** about the accident... can it be
faked for a while? Because it says that your interlocutor was also
*hearing* and was _reminded_. This is not a consultory! With enough
information we may be able to forecast which persons are proner to
hear voices and to hear of each other and how many are prone to go
into cline phenomena where one **version** will follow another in the
eyes of someone, or who will accumulate people, etc. You did not speak
of distances, phone calls may be to the next building or another
country, but I think the psychic was actually tring to locate someone
in the place.
Post by vtcapo
Dear Fabrizio,
Please apply your mathematic to the following events. I have a number
of people who would like an answer other than it being otherworldly.
Exactly what idea you have of mathematics? How many had an expression
in their faces and how many were just void? Then use common
statistics. Do you have pictures of faces and other data? Then we
might apply an equilibrium model to see how such particular system of
people would evolve, who would find whom again, who might follow
others, etc. Do you have a sociograph for the people implied? Then we
may identify other patterns and predict how they will evolve.
EVERYTHING in this theme is precisely saying it is NOT OTHERWORDLY. I
have not calculated it yet but a quick assessment once gave me over
720 different types of base schizophrenia. Which can then be ordered
in standard patterns of two to five people. And a few common themes...
before addressing other matters. Math has many faces actually, and one
of them is computing...
The girl I referred to may be a relative of MP and TA but also be
relative of PC (school mates). Some mathematics can justify to say
that some MP flew in TA with a PC and that was the message and
intention of the encounter! This is how Holmes in Doyle s thrillers
reasons and how some very schizophrenic brains DO communicate. A math
model can tells us what chances are there of this interpretation to be
real or spureous, how much information was needed to produce it and
other such characteristics for a general model, though in this thread
the point was to show that such encounters can be produced with
minimum points of control. I can _choose_ to investigate if any MP
used TA (or TWA) to fly with a PC (probably stolen) within such time
interval... or just let it be, and THAT is sanity indeed.
What did you expect to obtain with math? The psychic may not be
dangerous acting like this, but may be very dangerous if he keeps
informing of what he is not sure but CAN be produced through
mechanisms such as the self fulfilled prophecies, but mind that since
some people want to hide, uh, their condition, frauds are very common
and profitable for the real schizophrenics...
Danilo J Bonsignore
Danilo, your analysis of the events I witnessed is no surprise.
However, if people read my description of the events they know that
your exercise in paradigm preservation was way off the mark. Let’s
analyze what you said. Of course you have to take that blind leap of
faith in believing that everything I said was as they occurred.
Post by Fabrizio J. Bonsignore syntotic
But it is quite clear your psychic is schizophrenic, you
are a carrying field and some people in the room were
acting as antenna for him to *hear* something about YOU.
Once he *hears* something he tries to find out WHO IS
TALKING.
Schizophrenic? Show me your degree in Psychology and then you have the
right to make that accusation. You would be wrong, but at least you
would have some credentials to back up your spurious claim.
I am acting as a field and some in the room were acting as antenna for
him to hear something about YOU? I can understand the reasoning for
this. Known cons have used hidden mics and cameras where the audience
would gather. They would have their assistants correlate the
information and then do their magic. Remember, this is 1972, mics
maybe, TV no. But even if he used both they wouldn’t apply in my
case.
If you would have taken the time to read what I said thoroughly, you
would have read that in the 1st incident our group arrived just before
he was ready to deliver his lecture on numerology. We hurriedly found
our seats and sat down. Not a word except for an, excuse me as I found
my seat.
When he finished his lecture I went to the bathroom and then returned
to my seat. Others were milling about talking and those in our group
who had been there before primed me for what was to come up next. Not
once was there ever a word spoken concerning me quitting my job. The
slip and fall concerning my grandmother obviously happened just prior
to his readings and I was not privy to that information until I
received the phone call late that very same evening. No self
fulfilling prophecy there as you suggest.
This also applies to the 2nd incident. No talk about Rogers old truck
and how many miles he had on it. You are reaching. You know that and
so does anyone else with marginal reading skills.
Frankly speaking there is no way any mathematician can calculate the
odds of him predicting these two events happening in EXACTLY the way
he described. You may have convinced yourself but you will have a hard
time convincing others with the irrational mumbo jumbo you tried to
push off as authoritative. In essence, everything in your first two
paragraphs DOES NOT apply.
What you have actually done was once again convince me that science
has no explanation for both the 1st and 2nd incidents. Ockham’s Razor
suggests that from among competing hypotheses, selecting the one that
makes the fewest new assumptions usually provides the correct one, and
that the simplest explanation will be the most plausible until
evidence is presented to prove it false.
The psychic’s explanation certainly holds more water than the word
sieve you handed me. Well how to you like that? That’s a first.
Ockham’s Razor supporting a psychic. Where’s Guinness when you need
him?
RT
PS Danilo and all you multiple degreed mathematicians out there, lend
me you ears. The fact that the US government and the Soviet Union
engaged in psychic research was not because of some whim of the
imagination. They know that people like the psychic I mentioned exist
and wanted to exploit them for obvious reasons. It may not have the
attention it received back in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s but it is still
part of our defense budget buried in black ops. And I am sure that’s
exactly the way they like it. The big problem for the MIC (military
industrial complex) is that the psychics and remote viewers are seeing
“probable futures” and these futures are always in flux and can be
changed. Reliability has always been an issue because of this fact.
You want to know why Israel is using the Bible Code? It provides them
with a leg up so to speak concerning the future. If you know what
the probable futures are, you can prepare for any eventually. The
Jews are not stupid. They are running Codes day and night. Because to
them, it is a matter of life and death…
I mean, the problem is the PROBLEM is so Human that it is not family oblivious. So if they are not connected to the core, kernel as I called it, of the system, researcher observations will be BIASED. In metaphor: they WILL insist in opening a door through the garden fence BECAUSE only the right family people WILL have a KEY!!! People will make bets on the meaning of such word or such symbol, but only The Family will KNOW what it means. Families, plural, because unfortunately the space for these commuincations is crowded and you have some subfamilies. This can be translated into MECHANICS: researchers outside the central family kernel will establish biased mechanics for the system, while only AT THE KERNEL the full and meaningfully simple mechanic of the system can be understood, ceteris paribus. Though once the system is fathomed out, it can be taught and adjusted for others.

Danilo J Bonsignore

Fabrizio J. Bonsignore syntotic
2013-02-05 09:32:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Schizophrenia is *HEARING*, and *HEARING* bad. The fields provide the glue so to speak, but it is relative to people *HEARING*. No one *hears*? Field irrelevant. People *hear*? ANYONE can be a field in circumstances for them.
Post by tony fleming
Post by Fabrizio J Bonsignore
I board the subway train and find in the car a meaningful character,
not the first time it happens, this time she is who seems to be the
stray daughter of MP and TA from primary school. Since we were applied
Islam and the Qu ran so the outcome has to be no females left in the
generation the encounter is meaningful but the girl already knows that
maybe her mother or aunt or both were tortured. It seems a very
miraculous event I ve been going through for a while but it is very
easily explainable as just solving a system of differential equations.
In this case, all that the mind that effected the synchronizations
needs to output as outcome is very simple: the time at which to wake
me up. All other variables are already known and standard, all _that_
mind has to know is the time the girl and her tutoress are boarding
the train to calculate at what time to wake me up for me to arrive at
the synchronization and all the control that mind has to have, very
likely an old woman interested in the issue, is (basically) to wake me
up in time. All other variables are known: the distance between the
place I was asleep in the terminal and the train, the distance between
the car and the subway entry, the pace at which I walk, the train
speed, the moment the couple entered the subway and boarded the train,
my route... All this forms a model of the world that is not completely
or truly conscious but unconscious, that mind does not have to know
the exact measurements in terms of meters or have measured the average
speed of subway lines at every moment, which is unwieldy, but the
brain is recording such facts as almost meaningless data constantly
and storing them so they are available to make formal calculus of
consistency and coherency that enable it to solve a differential
equation system the way numerical methods do, and arrive at a simple
quantity-control model it can effect.
It was already known, even obvious, that I had to be in the zone I was
going to at the time I had to be there. I was awaken _just in time_ to
decide it was not too late to move and be there in time. The control
variable was in this case a man who sit in front of me in the table I
had my head over my luggage and who pretended to make a phone call
then went away. If he had remained in place for longer, I would have
pretended I was still asleep and wait for him to leave, even fall into
slumber again; the moment the man stands up there is time enough to
see it is not to late but just in time, pick the luggage and leave, so
that there is no implicit assumption of social interaction, but that
is very basic and _automatic_ social understanding among Humans. If
both had stayed longer in the same table, it would seem we are
actually friends and sitting together when in fact he just took
advantage of the free chair while I was a socially distant and
disengaged figure. The mind that perform the operation just had to
enact a simple control: *contact* the man at the right moment for him
to engage in his conversation and wake me up. Such mind was most
likely aware of the position of the girl-woman couple when they
boarded and where they boarded the train, probably at a very nearby
station in a line that has very near stations. Then since I woke _just
in time_ to arrive to where I had planned, my next decision is to take
the shortest path to the train. Some minutes earlier I would have
taken a different path and even changed my plans; some minutes late
and I would have missed it completely and stayed in the place to fall
into slumber again. This calculus is also rather simple and very
likely standard (average) among Humans, the relationship between time
to travel, time of appointment, slack time to be late or early, the
probability to change plans at the last moment, etc., so not much
additional information is needed here.
I take the shortest path and am ready to go into the subway without
wasting time in lines, but that is also a known fact at this time of
the month, so in that respect I am quite predictable, all the
differential equations system still has to produce is the moment to
start my walking. The stairs down to the train are the closest to the
entry and straight into the line direction I have to travel; I come
off the stairs as the train is just arriving. At this point there is a
fifty-fifty chance the synchronization will fail as I can choose to
take either car, one leads to the girl, the other _might_ have
produced a different meaningful encounter as there is a blonde female
hairdo that calls my attention, but the girl s encounter is more
meaningful overall than some possible flirting.
The same kind of simple control as the man making a fake call to wake
me up just in time can be conceived for the train system,
particularly, since conductors (there are actually live conductors)
can receive telepathic signals. In fact, the train _was_ traveling
rather slowly, but on that end it is conceivable necessary ONLY to
have one person receiving the signal and **manipulating** the girl-
woman system in a standard way. Particularly, assuming the couple
entered the car next to the library, they naturally end in the car
that has the closest path from subway entry to same car, but THAT is
data that is also relatively simple for a mind that is implementing
automatic, numerical calculus to produce two points of control and one
one time variable, since in the end the subway system does have fixed
distance-time relationships. Other assumptions on this freer (more
degrees of freedom) end of the system to take into account when
monitoring the schedule of the girl-woman couple, would have only led
to a different time to wake me up... or to a total abandonement of the
**plan** to synchronize _this time_ and begin immediately the next
possible plan for synchronization. But it is assumed at the outset
that the mind that is _dedicated_ to solve this problem of solving a
system for minimum variable-minimum control under constraints and
fixed relationship data does have the advantage of being dually
(duplex) capturing the signal from at least two of the actors in the
synchronization and most likely of more than two actors, which in this
case instead of adding complexity to the computation can actually
diminish its complexity in several ways, just by adding more fixed
elements to control the situation.
The unconscious mind can then act in parallel in different subsystems
to solve the different elements in the system, but in essence it can
solve the problem just be RECEIVING and EMITTING a signal
independently of its content to the different, in this case two points
of control (or maybe three, the conductor), and in real time perform
any adjustments necessary. All this effort can be done automatically
in parallel by a massively connected computing process with very
little conscious effort for a mind that is already obssessed
(dedicated) to the problem of connecting people with me. I think it is
an old woman s mind for whom additionally the problem of connecting
people and *finding the girl* is already structural.
So it can be seen that it is not a big problem, as has been the
possibilitating thesis since the beginning, to perform synchronization
even among parties that are not directly connected, as stream of
meaning, to the **central processor**, not even as signal reception,
as long as there are enough points of control (direct schizophrenics)
and monitoring capabilities (carrying fields) to provide information
over a fixed set of structural relationships like a city and the
subway offer. In other times in the fields it would have been simpler
probably though instead of personal synchronizations the outcome was
mobs, ordered mobs, **commercial** movements, sagas, cities... needing
only a few carrying fields, their control points and dually connected
central processors...
Danilo J Bonsignore
Hi Danilo you are talking about 'connection' as in telepathy. focus
just on this. what are you saying precisely. and where does
'schizophrenia' and 'fields' come into it?
Tony
Danilo J Bonsignore
Loading...