Monday Night’s Entrainment Demonstration…

Skeptics would call it a lucky role…

A lucky role? 3 consecutive choices … Each correct … 1 in 2 and the first … 1 in 3 on the second … 1 in 12 on the third against the wheel (1 in 38 I think).

What are the statistical odds of hitting it on the first role? Or was it pre-determined by intent.

Well, I saw it with my own 2 eyes. Glenn briefly explained the process, then executed choice one, then two, then three, then the role. Before I knew what was happening, there it was, the ball resting on the 6.

It must be some kind of trick right? Those were my first thoughts. Nope, Glenn explained it was the results of 2 hours focused intent entraining the game.

I think any reasonable person (except the somewhat less then amazing Randy) could rule out pure chance that this was done on the first role of the table.

So we have to look at what it could be. Is it entrainment? Is it something else? Either case it is something.

The roulette provides the perfect laboratory to test this entrainment skills, as well as “work the bugs out” of it so to speak. If we can entrain roulette wheel, well then what are the limits? What are the practical applications of this skill?

We have to assume that this process is going on all around us already. You’re either the designer or the victim of the design so to speak.

If we can figure out all the factors to the entrainment process and make the process more elegant, well, maybe we can entrain the wheel in 1 min rather then 2 hours.

Hell, maybe the next president will be of the Guilds choosing (if we could all agree) lol.

Luck, I’ve seen runs of luck that defy reason. Now I believe that person intuitively knowingly or unknowingly learned how to create luck.

Jared

Aloha All,

Monday Night’s Entrainment demonstration was about penetrating the decision layers in Roulette. We have discussed Entrainment for quite a time and I have been encouraging you to develop Entrainment applications. Mathematics and statistics allow us to evaluate Entrainment performance and no game is better set up to define our performance level than Roulette.

Monday’s Entrainment took about 2 hours to design and implement. The purpose was to demonstrate successfully the ability to predict the outcome of a single iteration of play. The goal was to predict three decision points in the game. The first decision point was whether the fall of the ball would be to the Red or to the Black. The second decision point was whether the fall of the ball would be in the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd groupings of numbers. The third decision point was what specific number of the proper color in the proper group would be represented by the fall of the ball. For our purposes that color was Black, that group was the 1st third, and that number was Six (6).

At the HQ there is a full size Roulette wheel and playboard. That was the specific environment to be entrained. It was intended that the first iteration of play would be the Entrained/Predicted play. The wheel was spun, the ball was dropped, and as the ball and wheel moved in opposite directions the entrainment occurred. Randomness was cheated as the wheel slowed and the fall of the ball nestled snugly in the black slot beneath the number 6.

Imagine that on each chip placed in each position on the board was for a sizeable sum of money. Compute the gain and tell me if 2 hours of mind work was worth it.

Aloha Glenn

Oops…that’s roll, not role… can hear Anne giving me a schooling right now ;-)

Skeptics would call it a lucky role…

They will, unless you duplicate this repeatedly over

a period of time under lab conditions.

So we have to look at what it could be. Is it entrainment? Is it something else? Either case it is something.

skeptics will call it luck until it is duplicated under lab conditions repeatedly.

what are the limits? What are the practical applications of this skill?

The lottery. psychics are obessed with the lotto.

We have to assume that this process is going on all around us already. You’re either the designer or the victim of the design so to speak.

Process must be duplicated repeatedly.

Hell, maybe the next president will be of the Guilds choosing (if we could all agree) lol.

???

Luck, I’ve seen runs of luck that defy reason. Now I believe that person intuitively knowingly or unknowingly learned how to create luck.

Process must be repeated under laboratory standards

alternatively the proof will be in the
amount of money you guys make during your next trip to vegas ;-)

Lyn

>

They will, unless you duplicate this repeatedly over a period of time under lab conditions.

Of course. That is the standard. Would you have it any other way? If you bend one spoon , willyou ever bend another?

What if Ed Dames was right on his first

prediction? (Whatever it was.) :)

Question. What is the difference between entrainment and remote influencing?

Mathematics and statistics allow us to evaluate Entrainment performance and no game is better set up to define our performance level than Roulette.

Why is Roulette the best? Is it that it’s nearly impossible to do something like slight of hand stacking the deck (like it could be claimed with cards) or is it that it’s already broken up into red – black etc? Or is it that the math is totally clear or maybe the quick feedback or that the wheel is already there at HQ? Or maybe something else.

Aloha George,

Roulette is definable, odds and probability can be calculated. Keno is another such game but a bit more difficult in my opinion. Roulette has physical presence, in example there is a freewheeling basin that is colored and slotted. The basin spins and a solid ball is spun counterclockwise along a tilted support flange until friction and gravity pulls it down to the basin where it clips the slot edges moving in the opposite direction until it settles into a slot when its kinetic energy is exhausted. There is no chaos until a player actually plays. The chaos factor involved in the game besides probability and odds would be impossible to gauge unless your Roulette Rig came with its own laboratory and staff.

Luck and providence has no scientific merit and is not considered to be a variable in the equation of Roulette. Not to say that I don’t believe in either but to say that surely a skeptic would not, could not, believe in either luck or providence. In that same light neither would they believe in theoretical entrainment or other Remote Viewing related practices. The skeptic’s playbook requires that they must accuse deception always.

When I designed the Entrainment I chose Roulette for its visual appeal and its calculable odds. I chose an environment that was big, that had pretty colors, fast moving parts, and chaos galore. For that one spin the fall of the ball was not probable, but predictable.

Glenn

Aloha Lyn,

Regardless of how many times it was accomplished anywhere a skeptic would not accept it. We are so far ahead of science in our thinking it will quite sometime before even a rudimentary understanding of these types of concepts are embraced.

Glenn

You ask a very good question and please forgive me if I get cryptic. I wrestle in my mind constantly over the mechanics of thought and our environment. Having been trained by Richard Ireland I spent a great deal of time in a state of absolute wonder over what I have seen and learned. The mind is amazing when it has discipline and that my friend is not gained by a mere want or wish, you must work your mind and learn to think solidly. Entrainment is not influencing. It takes more of a mind to understand how it is not influencing. I am fond of saying I just let it happen that way because if the Entrainment was solid that was how it was supposed to be. It was always a variable in the mix and I merely observed it how it would be in its time. Our reality fashions itself about us and we constantly try to keep pace and manage our view of reality. I merely step back and watch as it happens as I previously observed and not as an event of influencing. We all turn left or right based on the myriad of possible variables. In the Entrained environment we manage those variables.

When I set up the Roulette Table and placed the chips in their place then spun the wheel and dropped the ball it had all been done before in a very thoughtful way, very precise, very disciplined and it all happened in Jared’s reality as I had seen it in mine, only hours before.

Jared made quite a knowing statement and I will rephrase it a bit. If you are not the architect or designer of your own environment than surely you are part of someone else’s.

Glenn

Hi Glenn,

About 5 years ago I had some e-mail correspondence with a very clever guy from New England, I’ll leave his name out, he was a Doc. and involved in electronics.

The reason he had contacted me, and to give you some idea of the thoroughness with which he was about, he was currently involved in throwing dice at the craps table and he was able, through practice, to reduce the outcome to just a few combinations and from this he aimed to make money, I believed he had already done so in tests and trials. Now comes the interesting bit.. (save to say he got my link through a health supplement site and was experimenting with beta blockers because of the pressure being put onto him by the casino staff at the time he was playing. Remember it is necessary to hold a grid like pattern of bets and stakes to compliment the dice throws that in turn, for him, are not random and that the staff know all the trick and psychology – just like chess – and will use it against you).

I frankly didn’t believe it but before making an order from me, which was a lot of money, I made an aside comment to the effect that maybe it was not possible.. not using those words of course.

There was a pause of a couple of days and I got an e-mail, that I believe seemed to be quite agitated and in the interim period he explained to me that he was the inventor of the micro processor that originally fitted in the heel of the shoe – I hope you know the story, I was aware of it. The processor calculated the odds relating to the bias of the wheel at roulette, not only this but it told him the percentage play.

When this hit the media there were various stories going around that painted a rosier picture of the casino’s than of those who would dare to cheat them. But in fact the truth is the other way around if you realize that when the invention was used for the first time it was in no way illegal, in fact the Doc explained to me that he had actually needed to invent the processor because the current processing was not accompanied by a suitable low-level language. I’m not sure that creating a new low-level language interpreter is THAT difficult if you are in his field of electronics but it says something about the man.

This had a really lovely ending… he told me what kind of money was involved and it was huge, at least if you use the palpable tension around these casinos as a yardstick and not forgetting that anyone with a winning streak quickly gets everyone else copying the bets.

The ending.. he told me he bought his first house with the winnings before the processor was made illegal.

I can also tell you that the level of card counting used with 21’s is so high, when done professionally or semi-prof that the average pit boss or dealer would not believe it was being done, outside of some of the big cities that is, but very much to the detriment of the casinos – because it is vary bad for trade – they all now have automated card-shuffling machines. go figure.

At the time I also had some correspondence with a lovaly guy near to my home town that had used card memorisation to become world champion many years running, had a semi-business relationship with the orginator of Mind Mapping and was involved in setting up the World Olympiad originally, still runing. The group would meet at a hotel in the Strand throughout the year and it was open to everyone where preparations were done and trials held, stories shared and secrets.

O’brien eventually took a covert camera crew to a number of sites ending in Vegas. At the time having a fixed bankroll of £5thou and no idea if it would return a profit. It did and the resulting documentary was broadcast. IN ALL OF THE ABOVE, particularly the memorization, completely new ground was being broken and patches of existing knowledge sown together……..

Good luck!

Aloha George,

Roulette is definable, odds and probability can be calculated. Keno is another such game but a bit more difficult in my opinion. Roulette has physical presence, in example there is a freewheeling basin that is colored and slotted. The basin spins and a solid ball is spun counterclockwise along a tilted support flange until friction and gravity pulls it down to the basin where it clips the slot edges moving in the opposite direction until it settles into a slot when its kinetic energy is exhausted. There is no chaos until a player actually plays. The chaos factor involved in the game besides probability and odds would be impossible to gauge unless your Roulette Rig came with its own laboratory and staff.

Luck and providence has no scientific merit and is not considered to be a variable in the equation of Roulette. Not to say that I don’t believe in either but to say that surely a skeptic would not, could not, believe in either luck or providence. In that same light neither would they believe in theoretical entrainment or other Remote Viewing related practices. The skeptic’s playbook requires that they must accuse deception always.

When I designed the Entrainment I chose Roulette for its visual appeal and its calculable odds. I chose an environment that was big, that had pretty colors, fast moving parts, and chaos galore. For that one spin the fall of the ball was not probable, but predictable.

Glenn

If you study history you will notice something interesting…

History is shaped by the minority, not the majority. History is shaped by a few individuals with focused intent and a clear vision… the architects of the design so to speak.

The rest seem to be like cattle. Once the cattle are moving in one direction the rest all seem to fall in line, almost without thinking. Is this a process of entrainment? Or is it social proof?

Look at the Hitler regime… How could a whole nation be seduced into such madness? Look at Napoleon… Alexander the Great… On the opposite end, look at Gandhi, Mother Teressa…

Few could argue that they shaped our reality. The question is exactly how. What were the mechanisms at play?

Is it just social proof? Or is it something else?

Well, I’m sure you are all familiar with the 100th monkey effect. Because these monkeys were on isolated islands you can rule out social proof in this scientifically observable effect.

Is the 100th monkey effect an entrainment? Is it something else? Is the Hitler regime an entrainment? Is reality nothing more then entrainments playing out?

Compelling questions I think… Worth some thought and experimental time.

If it is in fact just that then that opens up the door to a compelling possibility…

In a complex system tiny changes create massive effects (ie the butterfly effect).

I doubt you could find a more complex system then the sea of potentials playing out we call reality.

If this is what is going on a small group of individuals who know what they are doing could in fact shape reality on a macro level.

The key is to "know what they are doing"…

We use to train our sales people to mentally rehearse the ending scene of a mutually beneficial transaction… Nothing else, just the ending scene. How would it look… And more importantly how would it feel both to the client and to the sales person.

That simple process alone doubled sales person’s volume consistently… No joke!

Look around you right now. You are part of someone else’s design? Look at the car you drive. Did you really choose that car? Com’on be honest. What about the house you live in? the music you listen to? What about the beliefs you hold so dear to? How much of that is truly by YOUR design?

Think about it!

It’s time we stop following blindly along with someone else’s design and we start to learn how to be the architects of the design. ESPECIALLY when the current architects seem to be hell-bent to lead the cattle down a course of madness. (You all know what I’m talking about).

Learn from history or be the victim of history? Better yet, be the architect of history!

Jared

Aloha Pam,

An interesting telling of your client’s efforts to win in the casinos. I recently viewed a program on the History Channel about some of the earliest known attempts to use computers to beat the odds and the house. It included a segment on a fellow who had the processor in his shoe and he had a fairly ingenious input/output so that he could win at Blackjack. I found the program to be informative and very interesting. With the technology zooming ahead Las Vegas will need to be on their toes for electronic innovations designed to attack their empire.

I have made several trips to Las Vegas and each time I had a great time. I love machines and electronics and Las Vegas is built on them both. If you go into a casino and select a spot to stand where you can view the gaming area and just observe for a bit you see what essentially is a giant gaming organism alive in a dozen ways. Several years ago I was watching Dick’s wife play Blackjack and as I watched I saw them change dealers several times. She was very good and the casino wanted to break her stride or slow her winning. It seemed to be mostly math and very fast decisions but she was better at playing than they were at dealing.

I sat on an adjacent stool to watch and found I was in front of a different Blackjack table and a woman informed me that if I wanted to sit there I would have to play. I had never played Blackjack but I do know the rules so I put a hundred dollar bill on the table and she gave me some chips. I continued to watch Mimi play and only turned back to my dealer when it was my turn to bet or stay etc. I also won each hand for about 11 hands at, 35 dollars in, each time. At some point the dealer who was a fair-haired woman changed. Her voice became very monotone and her movements became very deliberate. I found that she had sped the play up as I had to play at a much faster rate and she began to methodically take the casino’s money back and I only continued to play to see if she could. When my stake was reduced to about 125 dollars I gracefully acquiesced and tipped her the 25 dollars and removed myself from what was a very expensive chair. It was her table and her game, it was her world. I believe that she was the reason I lost not the play of the cards.

There are dealers who are known to be winning dealers for the house. I had conversations with several dealers and there is certainly an element of ability to win that dealers pride themselves with. So I thought for quite some time about the events at the table and while there is no reason to think there was anything else going on besides probability and odds I do believe that this woman exercised purposeful control of the play, deciding herself, whether I would win or lose. It is an interesting environment indeed and there is more occurring than simple odds and play.

Our efforts to develop entrainment applications with games where randomness and chance flow are intended to develop a sense of that flow and to join it.

Aloha Glenn

You ask a very good question and please forgive me if I get cryptic. I wrestle in my mind constantly over the mechanics of thought and our environment. Having been trained by Richard Ireland I spent a great deal of time in a state of absolute wonder over what I have seen and learned. The mind is amazing when it has discipline and that my friend is not gained by a mere want or wish, you must work your mind and learn to think solidly. Entrainment is not influencing. It takes more of a mind to understand how it is not influencing. I am fond of saying I just let it happen that way because if the Entrainment was solid that was how it was supposed to be. It was always a variable in the mix and I merely observed it how it would be in its time. Our reality fashions itself about us and we constantly try to keep pace and manage our view of reality. I merely step back and watch as it happens as I previously observed and not as an event of influencing. We all turn left or right based on the myriad of possible variables. In the Entrained environment we manage those variables.

When I set up the Roulette Table and placed the chips in their place then spun the wheel and dropped the ball it had all been done before in a very thoughtful way, very precise, very disciplined and it all happened in Jared’s reality as I had seen it in mine, only hours before.

Jared made quite a knowing statement and I will rephrase it a bit. If you are not the architect or designer of your own environment than surely you are part of someone else’s.

Glenn

Aloha Glenn,

Jared was correct in his knowing statement; "If you are not the architect or designer of your own environment than surely you are part of someone else’s."

In Silva Mind Dynamics they knowingly suggest the same

that you do manage your variables for certain outcomes;
"it had all be done before in a very thoughtful way."

If you don’t manage your outcomes you become someone else’s. Universe by default. Our personal universes.

Choice is discipline.

Aloha,

Johnm

Luck, I’ve seen runs of luck that defy reason. Now I believe that person intuitively knowingly or unknowingly learned how to create luck.

Jared

Jared,

Glenn has been blowing my mind for almost 9 years. Welcome to the Guild.

Home soon and I’ll work some of your targets.

Dick

How were the choices executed for the 3 rolls, and by whom?

— Rich

Skeptics would call it a lucky role…

A lucky role? 3 consecutive choices … Each correct … 1 in 2 and the first … 1 in 3 on the second … 1 in 12 on the third against the wheel (1 in 38 I think).

What are the statistical odds of hitting it on the first role? Or was it pre-determined by intent.

Well, I saw it with my own 2 eyes. Glenn briefly explained the process, then executed choice one, then two, then three, then the role. Before I knew what was happening, there it was, the ball resting on the 6.

It must be some kind of trick right? Those were my first thoughts. Nope, Glenn explained it was the results of 2 hours focused intent entraining the game.

I think any reasonable person (except the somewhat less then amazing Randy) could rule out pure chance that this was done on the first role of the table.

So we have to look at what it could be. Is it entrainment? Is it something else? Either case it is something.

The roulette provides the perfect laboratory to test this entrainment skills, as well as “work the bugs out” of it so to speak. If we can entrain roulette wheel, well then what are the limits? What are the practical applications of this skill?

We have to assume that this process is going on all around us already. You’re either the designer or the victim of the design so to speak.

If we can figure out all the factors to the entrainment process and make the process more elegant, well, maybe we can entrain the wheel in 1 min rather then 2 hours.

Hell, maybe the next president will be of the Guilds choosing (if we could all agree) lol.

Luck, I’ve seen runs of luck that defy reason. Now I believe that person intuitively knowingly or unknowingly learned how to create luck.

Jared