top of page
Search
  • Writer's pictureGabriel Boboc

Ideograms as gates and expanded target numbers

In almost every remote viewing method, we start by doing an ideogram immediately after writing the designated target number. I know there are debates over this subject but unfortunately I do not see these debates to ever develop into something that I find to be useful.


Since I do not believe in bringing authorities as arguments in a debate, I must rely only upon my own reason and understanding of things.


What we need now in order to bring advancements in remote viewing, are new theories from which new experiments and techniques may arise. The main idea is to improve the hit rate, data accuracy and range of applications for the remote viewing protocols while keeping as a well guarded core, the initial methods.


How this is going to be done, remains unknown for now but I feel that rephrasing, reformulating what we already know in new terms will give us important clues. And this is what I am doing in my articles. Rephrasing is equal to looking at the subject from new perspectives and revealing new aspects.


I can only write about what I observe. Remote Viewing is an iterative(self repeating) process, from all I can see. During all the iterations, the process not only gathers new data, but more complex data and also it is self correcting.


If we envisage all information in the Universe as spread on a big table like a map, we'll see that the remote viewing protocol when used by an intelligent being, is starting from a certain point where that being resides and it has a series of almost random steps towards the designated target. If there was a space containing all the information, then there is a unique spot on the map that corresponds perfectly with the target.


Some times the randomness wins and we can see the path of the process deviating a lot from the target, a truly random walk. Other times we see the path wandering, only to suddenly jump towards the target. And sometimes the process can't even depart from the initial area due to personal inclemencies of the viewer.


This shows me that the remote viewing process operates in two spaces at once: the "real" spacetime and another informational space which is mostly mapped onto our own biological neural networks. The second space is where we usually get lost.


We keep saying remote viewing is science or that science stood as a base for it's creation. Then it is time to see it scientifically.


The target is what I would call an attractor. According to Wikipedia: In the mathematical field of dynamical systems, an attractor is a set of states toward which a system tends to evolve, for a wide variety of starting conditions of the system.


A system that has oscillations, like a pendulum or even something more chaotic in it's motion, can converge in time towards a certain region or point in that space where it's path is progressing, step by step.


Remote viewing is starting with a first rapid interaction with the target when we draw the ideogram. This interaction is a contact in between our mind field and the real target in spacetime. So there is a brief function that takes values from the real spacetime and maps them to our mental space, our neurons.


Then we walk inside our own neuronal space and extract any sensation or word that matches the best with the initial mapping. But this means that the initial mapping has somehow projected the whole target site onto our cerebral cortex at a very low level, there where there is no language yet defined. A primitive level.


This was only the first action-reaction cycle in between our mind and the target.


This is an iterative process that goes somewhere. It has a path. Step by step we must steer it towards the target, closer and closer. Sometimes we get real data, other times we deviate from the real state of affairs.


This is why we proceed in increments, in remote viewing. First the process will give the value=true to the first bits of information and it prepares a second interaction which is (like it or not) in some percentage driven by the first batch of data.


In the second interaction, it either draws a new ideogram or it probes a new point on the ideogram and again new data arrives but in a weird (for now) manner it is associated to the first bits of data.


Example: 1) probe ideogram 2) I get smooth surface and red 3) instruct the lower levels to search if "smooth" is continued or not 4) probing again, the mind field now gets again to the target and expects to find "smooth" again at the next point or if not it will report something else like "rough".


This process of interaction will continue until the session stops and we get hopefully close enough in both spaces (physical and mental) to the target. Or not. I assume that the initial conditions matter in this case and it is hard to turn the process around once we got trapped in a fake data pocket such as an AOL drive.


This process describes an oscillation which can only take place when a system is interacting intermittently with another system and exchange energy/information.


There is a constant cycling feedback in between the body and target through the mind field as a medium and governor.


No need to say that every spot on descriptor leads to or is a resonance in between our being and the target. It is a physical resonance too and a physiological one. Resonance also means rhythm which makes me ponder if establishing a certain rhythm would benefit the whole session such as the path to converge or be attracted towards the target.


This is why I see the ideogram as a gate and as a hierarchically superior form of target number. If the target number or TRN gives us a direction, then the ideogram can be thought of as an infinity of TRN's that create a mapping in between our mind and the target.


Intent and cue, still remain attached to the ideogram just as with the TRN but this time the ideogram also represents a projection onto the 2D plane of a mind map possibly. And this is why we cannot see ideograms necessarily as a sort of language. It could be that too, but this is not their main advantage.


For example it depends on how my mind operates and what kind of sensory am I expecting to perceive at the target, such as my mind field impacting the shape of a car and drawing it accordingly.


But there is an issue here: our brains seem to use all sorts of mathematical transforms to understand visual data or other senses, like Fourier transforms. And if we try to project that transform through our hand response, then we'll get an ideogram that doesn't look at all like anything we know in this Universe.


So the ideogram response is depending also on the viewer's mind, on his biological inclinations, his subconscious preferences or safeguards, plus other aspects like the number of dimensions necessary to encode/decode the given target, the angle in which our mind interacts with it, and so on and so forth.


This is why the ideogram is a living thing. It is not always representing the target but it always represents a map in between our body's response and the target when mediated by the nonlocal mind field.


The ideogram is a projection of a graph and that graph may be in many dimensions and it represents the projection from the target onto our nervous system according to our senses. We have a 5 dimensional box (five senses) and we project onto it a map of an external object about which we do not know much yet. I am expecting to see even aliasing in between the senses or synaesthetic responses there where the mapping was done imperfectly.


Accessing the ideogram from point to point is like accessing a new TRN which bares another data bit which must be associated to the previous one. So accessing the ideogram, our body goes on that point in it's internal phase space and says: "ok, how did I feel in this spot? I felt warm. Ok, I'll move a bit further and I get...warm again...but wait...blue, etc etc".


So every time we access the ideogram we jump to the target but the address of the target, it's coordinates are even more precise, being completed and strengthened by the previous probing.


This is an oscillation in between the body and the target and the body uses the ideogram as a reminder of where it contacted it the last time.


This way, if we follow the procedures and we are in a good shape, this seemingly random path will be attracted ultimately to the target and perhaps sometimes we can have a strong resonance and experience bilocation.


Each new correct data is actually part of the correct address of the target. So this is what an ideogram represents to me as a remote viewer, at least.


I hope you enjoyed my insights into the deep mechanism of Remote Viewing and I am already preparing another article "On the Intent and the nonlocal mind field".









108 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page