Anyone heard about this dude? (pavelprorok on youtube)

[pavel_do]

Pavel, why do all of the pictures need to be different? Why don't you make each set of three photos consist of the same three?

Sorry, here is my posts that explined it.

Why cant it be let say only 2 photos say APPLE and CROSS… say 25 each that would make 50 in all.. seem easy I need to separate them in each pile… Yes that is not a problem.. BUT in this case though I am psychic but I am a human same time and the brain and mind still work in normal way.. and it is not always help.. example.. say I hold first two photos and sew round thing.. OK great that the Apple.. and I am right.. when I hold 3dh or forth envelope and If I will still keep seeing round thing that would signify apple.. my brain will get involved in doubting me.. like saying.. it CANT BE an apple 4 time s in row it just mix up.. u sew it last time.. etc.. Though I know it can be possible that all 25 in row will happen to be APPLES.. but I cant switch off brain.. and that the case.. for that reason It does not that simple as it seem from first look.. for the same reason I dropped ZENNER card practicing..

Why cant it be let say only 2 photos say APPLE and CROSS… say 25 each that would make 50 in all.. seem easy I need to separate them in each pile… Yes that is not a problem.. BUT in this case, though I am psychic but I am a human the brain and mind still work in normal way and it is not always help. Example, we use set of 50 photos with 25 each. 25 of Apples and 25 of Crosses, that was shuffled in order to bring them to a random. I hold first two photos and sew round thing.. OK great that the Apple.. and I am right... But when I will hold 3dh or forth envelope and If I will still keep seeing round thing that would signify apple, my brain will get involved in doubting me… Like “saying” it CANT BE an apple 4 times in a row it just mix up, u sew it last time...
Though I know it can be possible that all 25 in row will happen to be APPLES… but I cant switch off brain and that the case. For that reason It is not that simple as it seem from first look and can not be used in testing of my ability as it will not allow me to perform it with best results.

IF you looked at the list of the pairs each pair has different photo in different colors and shapes and structure… It is almost impossible have all completely different photos.. If I would see always exact colors when I hold it that would be easy I would make 40 different colors photos and would see them all exact. But as I said… I see all the time different, sometimes shapes sometimes colors some time exact thing or something that relates to the picture.​

​

 

[pavel_do]

Further, you've already attempted to redefine "pair" as "a set of two or three items", and now it seems that "the same" is to be redefined as "having deferent variations" (are they obsequious about it, or just quietly subordinate?).

having deferent variations - Example: I have a few photos of the Cross, but one of them is wooden, the other one is photo of the crucifixion of the Christ, another one just empty shape on the black background. And I have a 2 deferent houses, one of them in Winter the other one summer street with a few houses, also I have 3 photos of Egyptian pyramids , one of them is drawing with bright colors, the other one is real photo, and third one is pyramid with the sphinx.

 

[Akhenaten]

Without looking in any possible- physical ways in side of the sealed envelope, just by holding it between my hands, I will be able to identify the photo that will be inside and will name it.

This is your claim.

Virtually everything else you've posted consists of explanations of why you are unable to simply perform as stated - hold a sealed envelope in your hands and identify its contents.

All this nonsense about runs, pairs, triplets and seeing into the future is just obfuscation. Either you can see what's in the envelope or not.

Do you have this much trouble explaining what you see when you look out a window? Do you need someone to give you a choice of two or three possibilities from which to choose, before you can be sure of what you're seeing?

 

[Akhenaten]

BTW. You can't give examples of deferent variations. It's a meaningless phrase combining two words which would only be seen together in a sentence in this thread.

I'm guessing that you meant "different" variations, which renders a completely "different" meaningless phrase.

 

[pavel_do]

This is your claim.

Virtually everything else you've posted consists of explanations of why you are unable to simply perform as stated - hold a sealed envelope in your hands and identify its contents.

All this nonsense about runs, pairs, triplets and seeing into the future is just obfuscation. Either you can see what's in the envelope or not.

Do you have this much trouble explaining what you see when you look out a window? Do you need someone to give you a choice of two or three possibilities from which to choose, before you can be sure of what you're seeing?

I DO N0T SEE THINGS IN THE SAME WAY AS I SEE IT WITH MY PHYSICAL EYES! If you can see things with your eyes closed same as u see with them to be open I am happy for you. But I am not the case, I have explained how I see.
Re to the claim according the rules it can be extended and “explained” in process if negotiation. They don’t make any discussions or negotiation Unless u have submitted claim and you know that. I am working on the way that I could perform my abilities for that reason tried and still trying deferent ways! There is another that I will try today, that is deferent from pairs and triples.. If you can do anything similar to my, do it, the way you like it, 1 out of 100000 or one out of 10, with 1 or 100 trial..
I do it my way, the way I know the way I see. You will say I am not claiming it. You know I AM NOT CLAIMING THAT I SEE IT SAME WAY AS I SEE IT WITH MY PHYSICAL EYES! And I have explained it many time, how I see and that it is hard to get allot of completely deferent photos, as in one or the other way they will resemble, by colors background, shapes, structure, texture etc.. And I don’t see every time same way, even that I have explained many times.


P.s.
Sorry for capitalizing 2 lines of my post, just don’t know how more can I explain that I do not see same way as I see with psychical eyes, never claimed that, other wise there would be no problems with designing the test protocol at all. I understand that my claim can be turned upside down and interpreted all the ways, but I am not saying in it that I can see SAME WAY as with my PHYSICAL EYES.

 

[pavel_do]

btw. You Can't Give Examples Of Deferent Variations. It's A Meaningless Phrase Combining Two Words Which Would Only Be Seen Together In A Sentence In This Thread.

I'm Guessing That You Meant "different" Variations, Which Renders A Completely "different" Meaningless Phrase.

Я очень рад что ты можешь объясниться по Английски без проблем и писать без ошибок. Если ты так же можешь объясниться по Русски и писать без ошибок тогда ты гений, но я к сожалению нет!

p.s.
Though I spelled it deferent and not different, still I am sure you excellent understood what I said.

 

[Crundy]

Я очень рад что ты можешь объясниться по Английски без проблем и писать без ошибок. Если ты так же можешь объясниться по Русски и писать без ошибок тогда ты гений, но я к сожалению нет!

Wow, I didn't know I had that charset on my computer.

 

[Akhenaten]

<snipped a bit>

P.s.
Sorry for capitalizing 2 lines of my post, just don’t know how more can I explain that I do not see same way as I see with psychical eyes, never claimed that, other wise there would be no problems with designing the test protocol at all. I understand that my claim can be turned upside down and interpreted all the ways, but I am not saying in it that I can see SAME WAY as with my PHYSICAL EYES.

Not only is the CAPS thing not needed, but the fact is you don't need to explain at all. Your claim is that you can IDENTIFY a picture inside a sealed envelope by simply holding it in your hands. If the images you receive are not sufficient to IDENTIFY the picture, then you cannot, in fact, do as you initially claim. It doesn't matter if you're using psychic powers or x-rays, really, if you can't actually IDENTIFY what you see.


I'll try another approach.


It doesn't matter if the impression you get via your power is "orange round juicy" and you use that impression to correctly IDENTIFY a dolphin. Nobody will question your reasoning - just your IDENTIFICATION.


OK. I admit that some might be curious about your reasoning.

 

[Akhenaten]

Я очень рад что ты можешь объясниться по Английски без проблем и писать без ошибок. Если ты так же можешь объясниться по Русски и писать без ошибок тогда ты гений, но я к сожалению нет!

p.s.
Though I spelled it deferent and not different, still I am sure you excellent understood what I said.

Pavel, if you'd claimed to be able to speak Russian, and then proven it as easily as you just did (I think), then I would have been genuinely impressed. In fact, I still am, especially when I consider that your English is far, far superior to my Russian.

But you spoil it a little by demonstrating that you know the correct meanings and spellings of the words you use, yet continue to use the wrong ones anyway. What's going on there?

 

[pavel_do]

Pavel, if you'd claimed to be able to speak Russian, and then proven it as easily as you just did (I think), then I would have been genuinely impressed. In fact, I still am, especially when I consider that your English is far, far superior to my Russian.

But you spoil it a little by demonstrating that you know the correct meanings and spellings of the words you use, yet continue to use the wrong ones anyway. What's going on there?

The problem with the stupid spelling thing that often WORD (where I first type the text, automatically correct the words and sometimes to an absolutely wrong one , as one letter does make a deference as we know.. And offer it own spelling that confuses me allot as some of them seem the way it should be.. like deferent and different .. both sound right as the word I wanted to use… it just confuses me even more and when u look to synonyms there isn’t any to read…
Re to the words DEFERENT and DIFFERENT…. I have looked in the dictionary just now as in the Microsoft word program there inst anything helpful… So now I understood the DIFFERENCE between the two words.. thank you..

Re to the claim, according to the rules it has to be done in not more than in two paragraphs and will be extended in process of the negotiation. And they don’t “talk” to you until you submitted your claim. Other wise I would make it as detailed as possible with the descriptions of that I see shapes and stuff and to the exact image.

Re to the "orange round juicy" the problem that can be the orange sun set, candle fire, orange it self, or picture of the sun.. or anything elts that has orange colors.. and so many variations of the round… So when I see say.. orange juicy stuff.. and after I described that vision and I get to know that in the current set there is say.. Black cross, Egyptian pyramids and Picture of the Orange-red sun set. So I will name is as the one. not the black cross when I see orange stuff in my vision. As I said before, if I would see exact things or say always exact colors etc.. there would be no problems.. But even if we forget the colors.. and talk about shapes.. there is not much help.. as even that limited to a few variation.. and in the case with that I would need I don’t know to have 500 runs to beat 1.000 odds..

As I said doing my best to find the best way. Like Remiev mentioned .. what cant I have 9 same and 1 deferent per set… sound easy but as I explained that I get confused (we all would) when there is too many repetitions of the same picture, the brain will be doubting and getting involved. But I had another Idea.. say the same I have 45 photos,

1. I hold each of it in my hands..
2. I put a side 10 the most “bright” that I had a visions about
3. then from 10 I chouse 5 and name them what I think they ware.
4. then the envelopes are open and photos reveled.

Due to the 45 photos in set and as one guy calculated for me the odds will be covered if I get 3 or more correct from 45 photos and even if I will have 3-5 runs still the odds will be “enough”

I tried this yesterday and out of 10 that I narrowed from 45, 4 was exactly correct! Seem good for me, I will work on this way during the weekend and if it go same good, I can drop pairs and triples.. and make it easier by doing the way I described above.. BUT every time I would name any photo that I think Iam sure of and my vision was most bright.. I would not be able to look for the PARTICUALR one out of 45 as in that case, I will be doubting my self after a few.. whether I missed it cause there was a few similar shapes or colors that I have seen..

I hope my answer was understood and made some thing clear, if not I am happy to explain and expand what was not that clear or what created another questions.

 

[Thabiguy]

Due to the 45 photos in set and as one guy calculated for me the odds will be covered if I get 3 or more correct from 45 photos and even if I will have 3-5 runs still the odds will be “enough”

"One guy" didn't calculate it quite correctly. The odds of getting 3 or more correct by pure chance are about 1 in 816 (or 14195228938731/11576551623436800 exactly). That's not far from 1 in 1000, but still short of it - and especially it's not enough for 3-5 runs. You would have to go for 4 or more.

This new proposal is simpler, so I would recommend it, but only as long as you don't insist on too many runs. How about two runs at most? That would give you a reasonable safeguard against "random failure". And on the other hand, if you fail twice, then apparently you're not having a good day (whatever is keeping you from success is prevalent) and it's probably best that you get back to practice, or change your claim to something that you can do with greater confidence.

 

[pavel_do]

"One guy" didn't calculate it quite correctly. The odds of getting 3 or more correct by pure chance are about 1 in 816 (or 14195228938731/11576551623436800 exactly). That's not far from 1 in 1000, but still short of it - and especially it's not enough for 3-5 runs. You would have to go for 4 or more.

This new proposal is simpler, so I would recommend it, but only as long as you don't insist on too many runs. How about two runs at most? That would give you a reasonable safeguard against "random failure". And on the other hand, if you fail twice, then apparently you're not having a good day (whatever is keeping you from success is prevalent) and it's probably best that you get back to practice, or change your claim to something that you can do with greater confidence.

Ok, thank you. Can you or someone calculate the odds than? And post it here.
Odds for I pick 10 out of 45, than out of 10 that was picked I will chouse 5 and will name them.. What are the odds to name exact photos? One is 1 to 45 so we drop it.. we start from 2, than 3, 4 and finale five out of 45.

Well 2 runs is not enough I guess, I would be more comfortable with 5 or even 10 if it will be more evident due to “small” odds as you saying.

p.s

I calculated it just now on one of the WEB “calculators” http://www.webmath.com/lottery.html .. not sure if it is correct.. but
Here the results from there.

3 out of 45 .. the chance is 1 in 14,190 to name them in any order and be correct.
And to name 3 in exact order is 1 in 85,140
Four out of 45 is 1 in 148,995 in any order. And to name them exact is 1 in 3,575,880
Five out of five out of 45.. is 1 in 1,221,759 in any order and to name them exactly is 1 in 146,611,080

So I think if the guy who calculated things for me before used the same formulas.. than he is right..

Well my mathematics are way too bad to wauch for it.. but looking at thisn numbers I think 3 out of 45 would be more than enough and even if I will do that 1 time out of 5 or 10 still it will be more than just a chance…

If the calculations is correct than in order to make “runs” shorter I can make less than 45 photos even 20 or 25 would be enough to beat odds with 3 or more correct answers

 

[Moochie]

From what I've read here, this is looking like an attempt by guesswork, rather than anything supernatural. There's way too much fog coming from the claimant, IMO. I do hope the protocol negotiations are thorough.


M.

 

[Thabiguy]

Well 2 runs is not enough I guess, I would be more comfortable with 5 or even 10 if it will be more evident due to “small” odds as you saying.

10 runs with 45 pictures is 450 pictures. 3 minutes per picture, not counting breaks, would make it 22.5 hours total. That's not exactly the best way to make the test easier. You would be better off with your previous proposal of 270 pictures.

I calculated it just now on one of the WEB “calculators” http://www.webmath.com/lottery.html .. not sure if it is correct.. but
Here the results from there.

3 out of 45 .. the chance is 1 in 14,190 to name them in any order and be correct.
And to name 3 in exact order is 1 in 85,140

You calculated the odds of guessing 3 numbers and getting all 3 right. That's not the same as guessing more than 3 numbers and getting at least 3 right. The latter is obviously more likely.

On re-reading your proposal carefully, I realized that your description is too vague. You need to answer these questions clearly if you want to have the odds correctly calculated:
1. How many envelopes out of the total 45 will you try to identify? (10? 5? 3?)
2. Does order matter? In other words, if you select 5 envelopes and name them "apple, banana, orange, kiwi, melon" and the actual pictures are "melon, banana, strawberry, apple, mango", do you count it as 1 correct or 3 correct?

 

[pavel_do]

10 runs with 45 pictures is 450 pictures. 3 minutes per picture, not counting breaks, would make it 22.5 hours total. That's not exactly the best way to make the test easier. You would be better off with your previous proposal of 270 pictures.



You calculated the odds of guessing 3 numbers and getting all 3 right. That's not the same as guessing more than 3 numbers and getting at least 3 right. The latter is obviously more likely.

On re-reading your proposal carefully, I realized that your description is too vague. You need to answer these questions clearly if you want to have the odds correctly calculated:
1. How many envelopes out of the total 45 will you try to identify? (10? 5? 3?)
2. Does order matter? In other words, if you select 5 envelopes and name them "apple, banana, orange, kiwi, melon" and the actual pictures are "melon, banana, strawberry, apple, mango", do you count it as 1 correct or 3 correct?

1. At the moment I am not sure, it will depend on how many we would agree with JREF, but for now I would say I would go for the next. Out of 45 (or 30 or any number that we will agree, Possible I go for 30 as it will save time to go through them all)
2. Well if I will be tested in this way.. order does matter, as I will be naming the exact photo and not go for prediction that out of say 10 envelopes out of 45.. there shoul be any that I will name… so It should be in the exact order, but I would like not to take “disorder” out of account.. yes that is affect the odds.. but still, odds I higher than chance due to the number of photos that will be used in all. As I said I will try over weekend with this way.. what is a bit worries me is that sometimes and I told about it before I see them right but not in exact order.. it use to happen to me when I practiced before by pulling 3 out of 20.. ( like in video on youtube). Answering to the answer with your example with fruits..” "apple, banana, orange, kiwi, melon" and the actual pictures are "melon, banana, strawberry, apple, mango", it this case I would say I was right with 3 in disorder but still right.. and of course if only exact “hit” than of course only 1.. but as I said I would not like to take from account the odds when I would be still right but in deferent order.. as James Randi said in one of his interview.. ( don’t remember it exactly sorry) JREF would take in account the statistical data” cause if statistically odds to name in disorder 1 in let say 100.000 I guess still that is way more than chance…


Re to the timing I understand that.. I would not go for 10 trials if 3-4 or 5 would be enough… plus as I said I would prefer cut to a reasonable number the set of photos.. say to 30 instead of 45.. that would save allot of time.. and the odds would be still significant.. like.. if the web calculator is correct.. than.. getting exactly 3 out of 30 is 1 in 24,360 and in any order 1 in 4,060 still beat the odds of 1,000 and even if we would make it with the set of 20 to name exact 3 is 1 in 6,840 and in disorder 1 in 1,140. Well I understand that than in the case if I will be picking only 3 out of 30 or 20.
I think that maybe the golden middle, would be say 25 photos and the odds would increase respectively… It will be better after weekend I will be more or less sure of my results and how many photos would be better and how many should I pull of.. any way I think even if I would go with say 25 photos and would pull out 5 to name them exactly..
Is there any way to calculate odds for this case? 5 out of 25 in exact order and in disorder.. including cases where I would be say, 3 out of 5 exactly correct by naming exact envelope.

 

[Thabiguy]

... getting exactly 3 out of 30 is 1 in 24,360 and in any order 1 in 4,060 still beat the odds of 1,000 and even if we would make it with the set of 20 to name exact 3 is 1 in 6,840 and in disorder 1 in 1,140.

You need to understand that these numbers are only correct when you name 3 pictures and you get all of them right (either in the correct order or not). Is this what you want to do?

Your previous post indicated something different - that you want to name several envelopes (more than 3, like 5), and you succeed if you get 3 or more right. You need to realize that the probabilities are very different in these two cases.

So which is it that you want to do?

A. Select X envelopes (where X>3, for example 5 or 10) and name them, trying to get 3 or more right,

or

B. Select only 3 envelopes and name them, trying to get all of them right?

Please concentrate and tell us whether you want to do A or B. (Once again: A and B are very different.)

Is there any way to calculate odds for this case? 5 out of 25 in exact order and in disorder.. including cases where I would be say, 3 out of 5 exactly correct by naming exact envelope.

Guessing 5 pictures out of 25 and getting all of them right in any order is remarkable enough (1 in 53130) that you needn't worry about getting the order right. But again, this is only true if you guess no more than 5 pictures.

 

[rjh01]

Just had a look at the start of this thread. The thread is over a year old. pavelprorok joined Youtube in Feb 07. I think that says everything.

Please excuse myself while I roll on the floor laughing.

 

[pavel_do]

Just had a look at the start of this thread. The thread is over a year old. pavelprorok joined Youtube in Feb 07. I think that says everything.

Please excuse myself while I roll on the floor laughing.

You can laugh as much as you like….
Yes I did joined the JREF in February 2007 when I first time heard of it, and joined the Forum much later after all troubles with regestration etc.., and yes it was a year since my video on youtube, but it is not 1 day thing, it took me time to become finale a claimant by submeeting all needed papers, as my first application got lost in the post and then rules has changed and there was need for affidavit letters that I got only a month a go… it took time as there is life beside Forum here and challenge.. but you know that all, just need another reason to take a piss about.

 

[pavel_do]

You need to understand that these numbers are only correct when you name 3 pictures and you get all of them right (either in the correct order or not). Is this what you want to do?

Your previous post indicated something different - that you want to name several envelopes (more than 3, like 5), and you succeed if you get 3 or more right. You need to realize that the probabilities are very different in these two cases.

So which is it that you want to do?

A. Select X envelopes (where X>3, for example 5 or 10) and name them, trying to get 3 or more right,

or

B. Select only 3 envelopes and name them, trying to get all of them right?

Please concentrate and tell us whether you want to do A or B. (Once again: A and B are very different.)


Guessing 5 pictures out of 25 and getting all of them right in any order is remarkable enough (1 in 53130) that you needn't worry about getting the order right. But again, this is only true if you guess no more than 5 pictures.

Thank you for the post, I will answer it right after the weekend I will try different ways and will make up my mind about it.

 

[Gr8wight]

Well, I'm convinced. This is another test that will never take place.