Physical Clairvoyance
-
@Bereshith said
"Hmmm. Give any thought to the stastical odds of not getting even one card right?"
What the exercise is missing is a statistical method to determine if one is still in the region of guesswork or if the results are with a probability X not chance.
Of course there is also a negative not chance chance if I may say so, but the usefulness of that one eludes me.
-
93,
I shall keep at it, Crowley stated you should expect to get it right 1/78 times but getting that is no better than guess work really......Is it's purpose to develop intuition? Because surely practice effects will come into play and we just get better at guessing.
-
@mark0987 said
"I shall keep at it, Crowley stated you should expect to get it right 1/78 times but getting that is no better than guess work really......Is it's purpose to develop intuition? Because surely practice effects will come into play and we just get better at guessing."
1/78 on average is exactly random.
Yeah, intutition and later precognition.
-
Here is the calculation for measuring a statistically significant result by a basic q-test. (This is just the math btw. There are many other factors to weigh in on whether an experiment is "valid" in a scientific sense. But this will at least give a first level of filtering.)
The odds of getting a single card right are 1/78, or:
p = 0.0128205128205128Subtract this from 1.0 to get the next necessary value:
q = 0.9871794871794872If you try all 78 cards, then the a priori standard deviation is:
sqrt(npq) = square-root of 78 x 0.0128205128205128 x 0.9871794871794872
or square-root of 0.9871794871794872
or 0.9935690651280802To surpass the 20-to-1 (or 5%) threshold, which is the usual statistical "significance" filter threshold, you need to be 1.96 standard deviations above the expected occurrence (which is 1). Therefore, anything in excess of 2.95 right passes this filter.
So... 3 or more right might be significant.
To filter whether a given "significant result" was a random occurrence, do a series of them, and then use a simple chi-square calculation and evaluate it for "degrees of freedom" equal to one less then the total number of experiments you did.
PS - This presumes that you make your guesses and write them down without looking at the card at that point in time. If you look as you go, then the odds change and become very complicated to calcuate, because the odds are 1/78 for the first card, 1/77 for the second, 1/76 for the third... etc.
-
Well well.. Jim is a right statistician., I just finished statistics at uni.. i should have asked you mate.
No seriously, I would try practicing magick, daily visualization, concentration. Join a Reiki group, that is where i learned clairvoyance- or to put it a better way- that is here i learned to trust in my own abilities.
-
93,
I am going to keep at it, I do practice magick daily and meditate.
@Jim Thanks, I actually understood the maths, I did statistics in my gcse 2 years ago and it was good to have a refresher course lol. I always guess then put the card to my left and so it piles up. So it is 1/78.....so I'll just hope for three next time.
93's.
-
In your original post you asked about the usefulness of this practice.
I do this practice from time to time, and the benefit is this: it sharpens the rational mind and develops the intuition, harmonizing both. If you yourself practice and meditate you must have some sense of discipline, and so your lack of result is not so much a matter of inability, you just haven't located the portion of your brain that functions in a clairvoyant method. In other words, you have an inclination to the rational, but not so much to the irrational. I am very much the opposite, which is why prefer practices such as this one and scrying, etc.
The exercise has the effect of teaching one to work "without lust of result" in a trained way. It is a matter of activating both portions of the brain. Notice that one inclination is to tally the cards as the practice goes on, so as to increase the odds of success? The real secret is to use this sort of rationalization in conjunction with the intuitive brain, and this has excellent results on the human consciousness.
Keep at it, but remember not to cling to results. As I study and practice more and more, I find that this is the real secret to perfect living.
-
"The second point in Liber E, Chp 2 is usually ignored. Quality results are not likely to be obtained if you don't really understand the matter. Working with your own Tarot deck for a considerable while, at least a month, before undertaking this practice is advisable. Also, I would recommend that you read the material in Book 7, from the Golden Dawn by Israel Regardie, in relation to Clairvoyance, Skrying etc."
93,
I have been using my tarot deck for at least 6 months now. I shall seek out Regardie's book 7, his works are often easier to understand anyway.
93's.
-
Yeah, the more scratches, indentations and scruffy corners the cards have, the better your miraculous powers of clairvoyance.
-
Yes
Draco, I can read you on what you are saying. However, to defend the new sewage movement, though there are many nitwits- I have met many people who had genuine ability. A few more than i have say.......the OTO (during my time)I once joined a Reiki group, it was run by a lady with genuine talent. We would all see the same things, spirits, elementals etc. It was a major turning point of my magick and life. I learned to TRUST my already innate ability. I cannot see into the future- however regularly see and communicate with dead people, see elementals and more.
The last time I hugged my mother was during a midday sleep, in a cow paddock at work- I awoke with tears in my eyes.My mother would throw her pictures around the room. I once walked into a house, a lady greeted me, I described her to the owners to discover it was their mother.
Yes there are plenty of whackos in sewage as well as Thelema. But frankly, I have met more actual pyschic talent at new age groups. Actually, that is what is missing at Thelemic groups, to me a lack of focus on basic psychic ability.
Q
