ITC Bridge Home 
Home Search search Menu menu Not logged in - Login | Register

ITC Bridge has evolved into our sister site iDigitalMedium.com Please join us there or look us up on Facebook. For those of you interested in LIVE streams, go to http://idigitalmedium.com/streams As of 3/13/18 we will not be registering new users. We thank you for a wonderful 10+ years! ~ Ron & Keith

 Moderated by: Vicki Talbott, Keith Clark, fratka, EVPDave, ArizonaEvp Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2   
New Topic Reply Printer Friendly
A New Approach  Rating:  Rating
AuthorPost
 Posted: Feb 10th, 2008 01:27 PM
  PM Quote Reply
41st Post
Jeff
Moderator
 

Joined: Nov 7th, 2007
Location: Alabama USA
Posts: 127
Status: 
Offline
EVP_Babs wrote: Don't think I dropped off the face of the earth here. I am reading and trying to assimilate the knowledge.

The initial reason for asking if light blocked light was in relation to the theremin video that notemanz posted. I have seen quite a few theremin devices being sold on ebay which operate by something blocking a light cell. If a spirit is made of light and light can not block light than I would assume that anything that operates on that theory will be of no use.



Babs
Hey Babs.  I agree with your thoughts on a photo-sensitive arrangement.  Most phototransistors work on tight, filtered, infrared spectrum.  So any light energy outside of that spectrum would be ignored just because of the nature of the photo sensitive base of the transistor.  On those types of sensors, there is actually an infrared transmitter, and infrared receiver.  The transmitter is producing the infrared energy via a a lense that focuses the energy away from the receivers lense.  When something solid enough to reflect that energy comes withing that focused area, the beam is reflected back into the receiver.  This changes the receiver's gain into the amplifier it is feeding.  The closer the object, the more, or less gain is produced by the receiver.  In the case of the Theremin, the gain is decreased to lower the audio volume of the instrument.

The RF Theremin, which was the instrument I originally posted on, can sense proximity within its RF field.  This is why the thought occured to me in the first place.

Hope this helps!

Jeff

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Feb 10th, 2008 03:59 PM
  PM Quote Reply
42nd Post
Jeff
Moderator
 

Joined: Nov 7th, 2007
Location: Alabama USA
Posts: 127
Status: 
Offline
EVP_Babs wrote: The light conversation also brings to mind something I think about a great deal although I am not sure if it belongs within this thread. The majority of sightings are caught with the peripheal vision. The majority of my sighting are not only caught in my peripheal vision but also when the flash of a camera goes off. I assume this has to do with the refraction of light as well as the rods of the eye. I'm not completely sure where Im going with that thought but perhaps a good conversation can ensue.

Babs
Good thoughts there.  It's so true that from our peripheral vision we do catch movements; snap our heads around to look at the movement; and it's gone.  I seriously doubt anyone, who is not blind, has experienced that!  If blind, then there is another sense happening!

We know that our eyesight has a blind spot as a result of the optic nerve in the back of our eyes.  There are psychology results on record that prove we can sense far more brightness in our peripheral vision than our direct vision.  Particularly when our iris is dilated in dim light.  There is also the effect that when we hold our eyes to any particular point of focus for any extended length of time, the overall image will have parts of it disappear, and reappear while we watch.

Here's a sample.   Scroll down and download the pdf file.  Open the pdf file, and set the view for a full page so that the view is at maximum.  Stare at the red center block.  Do not move your vision from the center block.  You will begin to notice, while looking at the center block, the outer blue blocks will begin to disappear, and reappear.  This takes a bit of time to happen.  If you happen to look at the block that disappeared, it will reappear instantly!  That's because our eye electro-chemical reaction is one of the fastest reactions know to man at this time.

I only show this to prove that what we see, is not necessarily what is there.  Or better, what we do not see is there.

Regards to all!

Jeff

Attachment: Pattern.pdf (Downloaded 337 times)

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Feb 10th, 2008 04:09 PM
  PM Quote Reply
43rd Post
Notemanz
Member
 

Joined: Nov 27th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 144
Status: 
Offline
Jeff,

Is there a distinction between the "Rf" theremin and the musical instrument Theremin or are they the same?

Hence wouldn't a good RF proximity sensing meter (tri-field etc.) be similar?

Thanks,

John D

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Feb 10th, 2008 05:09 PM
  PM Quote Reply
44th Post
Jeff
Moderator
 

Joined: Nov 7th, 2007
Location: Alabama USA
Posts: 127
Status: 
Offline
Notemanz wrote: Jeff,

Is there a distinction between the "Rf" theremin and the musical instrument Theremin or are they the same?

Hence wouldn't a good RF proximity sensing meter (tri-field etc.) be similar?

Thanks,

John D
Hi John!  No, there are two types of Theremins.  One, the original (which is what I had in mind), creates two RF fields.  One for pitch; and one for loudness. 

The other uses photo controlled amplifiers to control both pitch and loudness. 

Your second question asks about a "good RF proximity sensing meter".  Well, John; and everyone; these meters are usually manufactured by untraceable manufacturers.  By "untraceable" I am referring to others than recognized manufacturers such as Fluke, Tektronix, and Hewlett-Packard. 

When Fluke, Tektronix, and Hewlett-Packard produce a device of any kind, they first prove the device in their laboratories, and then send them to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), http://www.nist.gov  (for security reasons, please click on the header of the site to be allowed in) to be compared with the standards of physics that have been established. 

The resulting comparison test, if it passes, is given a "trace" number for that instrument; as long as there is no change to the design, or manufacturing process to that instrument.  Thereby, that particular instrument has an understood basis for its function(s).  Any change in manufacture or design must be 'retraced'.  This sets the standard for confidence in that instrument.

Now having said that, these EMF meters that you asked about rarely, if ever, have a trace number;  standard of sensitivity, or response to said sensitivity.  Therefore, they cannot be included in scientific research of normal, or paranormal kinds.

I hope this clarifies things to not only you, John, but others who read this.

Best to all!

Jeff

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Feb 10th, 2008 06:40 PM
  PM Quote Reply
45th Post
Notemanz
Member
 

Joined: Nov 27th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 144
Status: 
Offline
Thanks much Jeff!  So if I understand correctly, a meter such as the Tri-field would not be considered appropriate due to no set standard of calibration?  If such meters can be used to trace evident EM fields in standard industrial type situations, why then (assuming some paranormal activity might indeed be EM radiation of some type) should these not be used?

Thanks Jeff.  I own a number of these units and have indeed recorded some anomolies.

Pls. listen to my recent posts on my Staticom thread I'd love everyone's ears as I'm trying to develop the system further.

Best,

John D

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Feb 10th, 2008 06:44 PM
  PM Quote Reply
46th Post
Notemanz
Member
 

Joined: Nov 27th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 144
Status: 
Offline
For members' info I'll list the models and manufacturers of the ones I have.  These include simple Gauss meters and some more sensitive models.

J

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Feb 12th, 2008 08:24 PM
  PM Quote Reply
47th Post
Jeff
Moderator
 

Joined: Nov 7th, 2007
Location: Alabama USA
Posts: 127
Status: 
Offline
Notemanz wrote: Thanks much Jeff!  So if I understand correctly, a meter such as the Tri-field would not be considered appropriate due to no set standard of calibration?  If such meters can be used to trace evident EM fields in standard industrial type situations, why then (assuming some paranormal activity might indeed be EM radiation of some type) should these not be used?

Thanks Jeff.  I own a number of these units and have indeed recorded some anomolies.

Pls. listen to my recent posts on my Staticom thread I'd love everyone's ears as I'm trying to develop the system further.

Best,

John D
You're welcome John, and apologies for the delay in response!  Yes, you understand correctly! 

These hand-held devices are not without value.  But allow me to  explain:  Let's say you're walking through an area that is under suspicion of paranormal activity.  Your hand-held device suddenly responds to something.  But what is it? 

It very well may be responding to a car, with a ham operator calling "CQ", or "hello", as it passes by; or a local police car transmitting.  As a volunteer Amatuer Radio examiner, I can tell you, that that transmitter could be producing 1 - 1500 watts of RF power!  But unless you have an instrument that can differentiate normal RF energy from what may be paranormal, you cannot determine what is what.

This is why I recommend researchers put away non-known devices; and use known devices based on physical standards; just like the Metascience Foundation did 20+ years ago.  Their instruments were the best made at the time.  Except for the 13 tone generator, the rest of the instruments were Hewlett-Packard devices from NASA.

Now, if you're using a standard device, it would respond to normal RF energies.  That much you can depend.  If you have that standard device, along with one of those EMF non-standard devices; and one responds, and the other one doesn't; you now have a situation that you can be suspicious of!

We must compare the known from the variable:wink: 

This is where the research has solidity, and scientific proof! 

Hope this helps,

Jeff

Last edited on Feb 12th, 2008 09:09 PM by Jeff

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Feb 12th, 2008 11:10 PM
  PM Quote Reply
48th Post
Notemanz
Member
 

Joined: Nov 27th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 144
Status: 
Offline
Very informative!  Are there any EMF detectors that you feel comfortable recommending?

John D

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Feb 13th, 2008 07:09 AM
  PM Quote Reply
49th Post
fratka
Moderator


Joined: Feb 21st, 2007
Location: Houston, Texas USA
Posts: 318
Status: 
Offline
Keith,

Have you tried photoresistors in series with germanium diodes while then using different colors of light? Keep in mind if you don't sheild it, you will get all kinds of local radio stations though.

I got some very interesting results from it. I will have to dig some examples up to post.

Regards,

Frank R.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Feb 13th, 2008 07:42 AM
  PM Quote Reply
50th Post
Keith Clark
Administrator


Joined: Dec 31st, 2006
Location: Clearwater, Florida USA
Posts: 1637
Status: 
Offline
No Frank, I haven't. Been too tired lately for electronic stuff. Ideas sounds great though. WIll keep it in mind.

Thanks,

Keith

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Feb 13th, 2008 09:09 AM
  PM Quote Reply
51st Post
EVP_Babs
Member


Joined: Jan 23rd, 2008
Location: Atlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 28
Status: 
Offline
Notemanz wrote: Very informative!  Are there any EMF detectors that you feel comfortable recommending?

John D

As far as I am aware, the TriField meters are designed to ignore man-made EMF's.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Feb 13th, 2008 09:20 AM
  PM Quote Reply
52nd Post
Notemanz
Member
 

Joined: Nov 27th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 144
Status: 
Offline
That is my understanding too Babs but I thought Jeff might give his thoughts too.  I've found as he's said, that some of these meters are just crap.  There is one that was used on Ghost Hunters that reacts to T.V. remote sugnal and such.

The tri-field seems to be resistant to most types of signal producing false positives.

Best,

John D

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Feb 14th, 2008 05:51 PM
  PM Quote Reply
53rd Post
Jeff
Moderator
 

Joined: Nov 7th, 2007
Location: Alabama USA
Posts: 127
Status: 
Offline
EVP_Babs wrote: Notemanz wrote: Very informative!  Are there any EMF detectors that you feel comfortable recommending?

John D

As far as I am aware, the TriField meters are designed to ignore man-made EMF's.
Hi Babs, and John.  First, let me clarify:  Instruments from AlphaLabs are good ones.  I don't want anyone thinking I am in any way saying those instruments are of poor manufacture.  They certainly are not. 

Babs, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you misinterpreted the TriField functions.  The TriField meter has several settings, as you know.  The basic settings are two for static magnetics (2 different sensitivities), one for electric field strength, and one for RF energy. 

If the device is set for electrical field sensing, then the device will not respond to RF, or static magnetic energy; well, not very well anyway, and that is the desired design. 

I'm thinking this is what you are interpreting as "ignoring man-made EMF". But when the meter is set for RF, it will respond to any RF it senses.  So there is simply no way to differentiate the source of the energy. 

A meter than can differentiate, by adjusting its bandwidth of sensitivity, would be like one of the devices manufactured by Bird Electronics.  http://www.bird-electronic.com/

If you visit that site, you will immediately see the "Signal Hawk" that has a frequency spectrum display.  If an RF energy should be sensed, it would show that "spike" at the frequency.  Thereby, the user can instantly see if the RF is within an ITU, or FCC, band that would prove the source of RF is "man-made".  In addition, if the user wishes to 'track' that particular frequency, and ignore others (to keep the display 'clean'), then the device can be programmed to do just that.  It will also perform frequency analysis (software included), and download that data to your computer for deeper research. 

This is the device that the FCC, and other authorities use for RF analysis.  It is also listed with the NIST as a traceable instrument.

I know what you and John are thinking.  Yup!  Very expensive!  And I am not advocating everyone to sell their houses to purchase one!  This is only for information, and education on the subject matter. 

Here's a good example of the Signal Hawk's use in paranormal research for the insanely wealthy:  The spirit-safari is on, and the researchers are walking through a suspected area of paranormal activity.  One of the researcher's is holding the Signal Hawk in his/her hands (REALLY CAREFULLY) :wink:.  Suddenly, there is a spike in the spectrum display.  The spike goes away.  The user notices what frequency the spike was at, and finds the spike was not within normal communication bands.  The user then slowly moves the device about looking for that same spike.  Suddenly that spike appears again, and stays!  Now, that user has a scientific reason to pursue asking questions, calling all video, and audio EVP members to the area, and begin good research.

For those reading this, I would offer the following details:  If you are a member of a paranormal research team, and have been called to investigate an area (building, or no), it would be prudent to find out the following information before arriving at the site: 

1 - Get a map of the locality.  Look for any airports, police departments, fire departments, radio stations, television broadcast stations, electrical power substations, commercial utilities (trucks with radios), refineries, or industrial plants (hand-held radios), that might be nearby.
Mark them down on the map.

2 - Call the places in question, and explain to them you are investigating abnormal RF energy near their locale.  Explain you require their communication frequency(ies) to program them out of the spectrum under investigation.  Personally, I have found that a simple, good explanation will yield favorable results.

3 - In case the contact called is not willing to divulge said frequencies, have no dispair.  This is public information that the FCC has to give.  Simply call the FCC to obtain the frequencies.

Now, you're sorted out, and ready to get after a good investigation, knowing you have filtered out the normal RF activity that would be present.

Hope this helps!

All the best,

Jeff

Oh! Happy Valentine's Day all!

Last edited on Feb 14th, 2008 07:24 PM by Jeff

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Feb 20th, 2008 05:49 AM
  PM Quote Reply
54th Post
EVP_Babs
Member


Joined: Jan 23rd, 2008
Location: Atlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 28
Status: 
Offline
Jeff,

I have two TriField Natural EM Meters. There are four settings; magnetic, electric, radio/microwave and sum. "Sum" combines both the electric and magnetic settings.
To the best of my knowledge they are designed to ignore any possible man-made interferences. To date, (approx 4 years and many investigation in many active locales) the meters have not noted any disturbances.  I do not hold them but place them in a stable location in areas noted for activity.  Many of these type devices are single axis. The TriField Natural is triple axis. When I purchased them, I had high hopes. I have been sorely disappointed.

The peripheal vision topic fascinates me. I have seen two FBA's peripheally as the flash of someones camera fired. Also, I once was able to see someone's aura through the reflection in a mirror. This person is a Reiki Master and quite skilled at manipulating her own energy. I was able to see it expand and retract both from her crown and her hands. This led me to think that seeing  "beyond the veil" has to do with light refraction; the light having to bounce off of something near. I've been trying to develop a mirror attachment for a camera lens that would allow the photo to be taken "peripheally". The simple approach would be to use to cameras, one with a flash and one without, place at 90 degree angles next to eachother and fire simutaneously. I'm leaning towards the mirror attachment because although I take very few photos on investigations, the ones that have caught my attention are ones I take over my shoulder try to "catch them in the act".

Now back to the Theramin... Some of the ones I've been seeing utilize light blocking. If a ghost is made of light and light technically can not block light then this approach seems futile. Synchronisticly (sp?) one of my team members has told me he has a friend with a Theramin and we should be able to try it soon. I think it would be of benefit to explain and demonstrate it to the spirits as well. I am looking forward to it.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Feb 20th, 2008 09:44 AM
  PM Quote Reply
55th Post
Notemanz
Member
 

Joined: Nov 27th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 144
Status: 
Offline
Babs,

Good points I agree re: the Tri-field although I've actually had some luck with it.

As to the camera ideas. Here is a link to a great company that can alter your digital cameras to enable them to shoot IR and Ultra-viloet.  Highly interesting results so far.  I'd recommend this as another tool in your investigations.

http://www.lifepixel.com

Have fun with the theremin.  Highly doubtful that it will do what you hope but heck why not!

If you have problems finding one send me a PM and I might be able to ship one of mine to you guys.

Best,
John D

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Feb 20th, 2008 06:40 PM
  PM Quote Reply
56th Post
Jeff
Moderator
 

Joined: Nov 7th, 2007
Location: Alabama USA
Posts: 127
Status: 
Offline
Hey Babs!  Well, yes, I undestand your disappointment in the meters.  Sorry you spent the money for them.  You see, those meters cannot differentiate, or filter out, what it is exactly what you are looking for.  They respond to anything!  Well, what was that?  You have no idea.  Like I said before,  that meter may be responding to Police, Ambulance/Hospital, industry, or any other electro-magnetic disturbance.  By the way, there can be no differentiation of what is "natural", "supernatural", or "man-made".  Period.  Sorry you have been deceived.  All physical forces in our universe are already there.  If man manipulates (modulates) those forces, no-one can tell, except by the standards set by the FCC and ITU.  If modulation happens in those bands of frequency, then we can disregard them!

The meters you refer to cannot differentiate what is "man-made" or otherwise.  If that needle jumps, you have no idea why.  That is why I brought up the Signal Hawk.  That device can filter out undesireable emissions of RF, EMF, or electrical fields, as well as Cell Phone, EDGE, Ethernet (TCP/IP, UDP/IP), or many other protocols that are surrounding us all.  We live in a new world of RF communications.  We are completely permeated with RF of varying power, and frequency, as never before.  One cannot just walk into an area with a global responding meter, and believe in whatever the meter is responding to.

One must do the homework.  Please, all who read this, do the steps I recommended in the previous post.

Then, and only then can you have confidence in what the instrument is responding to.

Blessings!

Jeff

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Feb 20th, 2008 07:15 PM
  PM Quote Reply
57th Post
Notemanz
Member
 

Joined: Nov 27th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 144
Status: 
Offline
Agreed Jeff...  I do feel however that the tri-field may be of use depending on the reaction.  I will only take note if there is a dramatic number of random "surges" that seem out of the ordinary.  Spending time getting base readings is imperative and as Jeff says, try to rule out any reasonable interference.... 

Is there a firehouse near-by? Police? What is the nature of the locations' wiring....  etc. All things that I bet you guys already do....

I've gathered evp that corresponds to wild spikes in the meter.  I make note of the time of any spikes etc. and listen carefully for any potential para normal evp activity at the same time.

In general, Jeff is right on with the cautionary advice...

Best,

John D

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Feb 21st, 2008 05:48 AM
  PM Quote Reply
58th Post
EVP_Babs
Member


Joined: Jan 23rd, 2008
Location: Atlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 28
Status: 
Offline
I'm really quite frustrated now. Mostly in myself for not having the technical intelligence I need. I did wonder how the meter could differentiate between man-made and natural believing that "man-made" are simply manipulations of natural.

I always get base readings and have had meters spike but could never determine what might have caused the flucuation. Only once did it seem to correlate to a fellow investigator who began to "channel". Anyway, I've been using them for 6 years and have just about given up on their relevancy besides to detect high base readings. I do, however, like them better than the other gadgets being used like the Cell Sensor. I have to laugh every time I see folks waving them around.

Here is a question- just how far can a radio signal from say a police station travel? If a police station is 3 miles away can I rule it out? If it's 30 miles away....


BTW- I want to comment on the kindness of the members here. You two guys have been extremely kind and patient with me and it does not go unnoticed.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Feb 21st, 2008 05:03 PM
  PM Quote Reply
59th Post
Jeff
Moderator
 

Joined: Nov 7th, 2007
Location: Alabama USA
Posts: 127
Status: 
Offline
EVP_Babs wrote: I'm really quite frustrated now. Mostly in myself for not having the technical intelligence I need. I did wonder how the meter could differentiate between man-made and natural believing that "man-made" are simply manipulations of natural.

I always get base readings and have had meters spike but could never determine what might have caused the flucuation. Only once did it seem to correlate to a fellow investigator who began to "channel". Anyway, I've been using them for 6 years and have just about given up on their relevancy besides to detect high base readings. I do, however, like them better than the other gadgets being used like the Cell Sensor. I have to laugh every time I see folks waving them around.

Here is a question- just how far can a radio signal from say a police station travel? If a police station is 3 miles away can I rule it out? If it's 30 miles away....


BTW- I want to comment on the kindness of the members here. You two guys have been extremely kind and patient with me and it does not go unnoticed.

Hey Babs!  I see now that you are steep on a learning curve!  You go girl!  Yes, as you have just said, a meter that has a global response to any disturbance really tells you nothing, but that there was a disturbance.  Now, I must say your example of a spike at the meter, followed by a channeling of a gifted person, is substantial evidence of Spirit activity.  Thanks for mentioning that!  Quite honestly, I should have thought of that very scenario before in my previous dissertations. 

A police radio has, on the average, 50 watts of RF transmitting power, and can cover roughly 50 miles.  Same for ambulatory, fire, and many other RF type communications.  So to answer your question "can I rule it out?", the answer is simply no.  Aircraft is even much, much farther because of the altitude of the aircraft itself.  A typical aircraft radio can transmit over 100 miles quite easily based on the altitude.  Oh, and aircraft communications happen around 170+ MHz.  Your meter may, or may not have the bandwidth to respond to those freqs, but I would wager it certainly can.

Cell Sensor?!  :lol:  Now you're killing me!  It amazes me what people will spend good money on.  Unfortunately, such people know no better, and others will take very bad advantage of that!

NO!  Thank you Babs!  I enjoy offering my science and learning to others, like yourself, who really wish to learn, and apply that knowledge to research!

Really, my honor.

Jeff

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Feb 21st, 2008 05:25 PM
  PM Quote Reply
60th Post
EVP_Babs
Member


Joined: Jan 23rd, 2008
Location: Atlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 28
Status: 
Offline
I know I this is getting away from the original topic here an I apologize.

That being said ;) what about a light detector designed to detect infared light and ignore ambient?

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Feb 21st, 2008 05:40 PM
  PM Quote Reply
61st Post
Jeff
Moderator
 

Joined: Nov 7th, 2007
Location: Alabama USA
Posts: 127
Status: 
Offline
EVP_Babs wrote: I know I this is getting away from the original topic here an I apologize.

That being said ;) what about a light detector designed to detect infared light and ignore ambient?

Those are readily available, Babs.  Please forgive me, but I'm not sure where you are going with this one.  Why are you addressing infrared energy?  Have you had an experience with Spiritual activity at that wavelength?  If so, please let us in! 

Most infrared instruments, Babs, are used in thermionic research.  Here's one of the  excellent hand-held infrared thermometers manufactured by Fluke:

http://us.fluke.com/usen/products/Fluke+568+566.htm

So is your question based on temperature?

Jeff

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Feb 21st, 2008 07:04 PM
  PM Quote Reply
62nd Post
Jeff
Moderator
 

Joined: Nov 7th, 2007
Location: Alabama USA
Posts: 127
Status: 
Offline
Oh, and Babs, you were previously discussing "the corner of the eye" concept. 

Well, we know that "what we see", may not be what is going on.  In that mindset, here's another visual illusion.   What you will see is a circle of pink dots (see below).  One of the dots is more pronounced than the others; and rotates along the circle.  At the center of the circle is a cross-target.  If you stare at the center cross-target, the pink-rotating dot will quickly become green.  The surrounding pink dots will begin to disappear. 

This illusion proves that "what we see is not what is really there"; or otherwise.  Our senses are amazing, yet far from perfect.  Not to mention the psychological reception we receive from our senses.  This is a psychological demonstration; really has nothing to do with eyesight!

Jeff

Last edited on Feb 21st, 2008 07:20 PM by Jeff

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Feb 21st, 2008 07:11 PM
  PM Quote Reply
63rd Post
Jeff
Moderator
 

Joined: Nov 7th, 2007
Location: Alabama USA
Posts: 127
Status: 
Offline
OK, here it is:


Attached Image (viewed 179 times):

image.gif

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Feb 22nd, 2008 04:38 AM
  PM Quote Reply
64th Post
EVP_Babs
Member


Joined: Jan 23rd, 2008
Location: Atlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 28
Status: 
Offline
Okay, the "dots" hurt my eyes! Thanks Jeff!! :)

I know that the light detectors are available. My thought is that if spirit is light than could they also use the light detector to communicate? The theramin that utilizes the sensor for blocking light won't/shouldn't work but a detector on the other hand....

I'm not exactly sure how the detectors respond but I would think it should be fairly easy to modify the board and have it make a tone, play a song, etc.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

You have chosen to ignore Estee. click Here to view this post

 Posted: Feb 22nd, 2008 10:14 AM
  PM Quote Reply
66th Post
Notemanz
Member
 

Joined: Nov 27th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 144
Status: 
Offline
Jeff thanks so much for the tutorials!!  Gang, Jeff's point re: spending money foolishly is such good advice. Pls. also consider that the Theremin (whcih seems to have piqued interest) is a rather crude musical device that simply makes pitch via the proximity of your hand. 

Just as Jeff mentioned the questionable purchase of something like the cell sensor pls. be also cautious when running out to buy a musical device such as this.  If you do decide to purchase, have fun with it but my goodness don't expect a ghost to come in and make sounds on it!!  LOL 

It's as silly as thinking that ectoplasm might come out of it!! (Tongue in cheek!)

Babs, pls. read my thread re: Infra red and UV cameras. These aren't that expensive and I can tell you, we've gotten some very interesting images.

The link is above!

I so appreciate Jeff's expertise. We must all use our common sense and look at the science and physics of the material universe.

Best,
John D


Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Feb 22nd, 2008 10:17 AM
  PM Quote Reply
67th Post
Notemanz
Member
 

Joined: Nov 27th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 144
Status: 
Offline
If interested, here are a few films that employed the theremin:

Day the Earth stood still
Man from Planet X
Lost Weekend
Star trek TOS
Forbidden Planet

And just about every other sci-fi film from the 50's-60's

JD

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Feb 22nd, 2008 10:18 AM
  PM Quote Reply
68th Post
Notemanz
Member
 

Joined: Nov 27th, 2007
Location:  
Posts: 144
Status: 
Offline
EVP_Babs wrote: Okay, the "dots" hurt my eyes! Thanks Jeff!! :)

I know that the light detectors are available. My thought is that if spirit is light than could they also use the light detector to communicate? The theramin that utilizes the sensor for blocking light won't/shouldn't work but a detector on the other hand....

I'm not exactly sure how the detectors respond but I would think it should be fairly easy to modify the board and have it make a tone, play a song, etc.


Babs, again pls. check out the web site above. If you're interested in light as a medium why no try the cameras?

JD

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Feb 22nd, 2008 11:37 AM
  PM Quote Reply
69th Post
Jeff
Moderator
 

Joined: Nov 7th, 2007
Location: Alabama USA
Posts: 127
Status: 
Offline
EVP_Babs wrote: Okay, the "dots" hurt my eyes! Thanks Jeff!! :)

I know that the light detectors are available. My thought is that if spirit is light than could they also use the light detector to communicate? The theramin that utilizes the sensor for blocking light won't/shouldn't work but a detector on the other hand....

I'm not exactly sure how the detectors respond but I would think it should be fairly easy to modify the board and have it make a tone, play a song, etc.

Just to clarify Babs, in my original post, I was referring to the RF Theremin with antennas.  Just like the one Lydia Kavina plays.  Not the photo-sensitive device.

Sorry about hurting your eyes!  :wink:

Jeff

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Feb 22nd, 2008 12:01 PM
  PM Quote Reply
70th Post
Jeff
Moderator
 

Joined: Nov 7th, 2007
Location: Alabama USA
Posts: 127
Status: 
Offline
Nice to see you back Estee!

Jeff

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

You have chosen to ignore Estee. click Here to view this post

 Posted: Feb 22nd, 2008 01:04 PM
  PM Quote Reply
72nd Post
EVP_Babs
Member


Joined: Jan 23rd, 2008
Location: Atlanta, Georgia USA
Posts: 28
Status: 
Offline
Jeff wrote: EVP_Babs wrote: Okay, the "dots" hurt my eyes! Thanks Jeff!! :)

I know that the light detectors are available. My thought is that if spirit is light than could they also use the light detector to communicate? The theramin that utilizes the sensor for blocking light won't/shouldn't work but a detector on the other hand....

I'm not exactly sure how the detectors respond but I would think it should be fairly easy to modify the board and have it make a tone, play a song, etc.

Just to clarify Babs, in my original post, I was referring to the RF Theremin with antennas.  Just like the one Lydia Kavina plays.  Not the photo-sensitive device.

Sorry about hurting your eyes!  :wink:

Jeff


Right. One thing just lead to another in my busy mind. :)

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

Current time is 09:23 PM Page:  First Page Previous Page  1  2     
ITC Bridge > Instrumental Transcommunication (ITC) > Electronic Voice Phenomena (EVP) > A New Approach Top




UltraBB 1.17 Copyright © 2007-2008 Data 1 Systems
Page processed in 0.2048 seconds (24% database + 76% PHP). 24 queries executed.