Anyone heard about this dude? (pavelprorok on youtube)

[Startz]

Pavel has now reported a couple of different experimental outcomes that are very unlikely to have occurred by chance. Varying exactly how many are picked out of how many photos doesn't seem to be a central issue any more. Perhaps what would be most helpful would be for knowledgeable folks to make suggestions about the appropriate controls to assure a valid experiment.

 

[TheBoyPaj]

Are there particular pictures that you find easy to identify?

For example, if you found a star card the easiest to see, wouldn't it be simpler to have ten envelopes, nine blank cards and you just find the star? Then just shuffle the cards and repeat? The multiple guesses on each shuffle seems to confuse the issue and make the odds harder to calculate. Finding a picture among blank cards should be even easier, right?

 

[pavel_do]

Pavel has now reported a couple of different experimental outcomes that are very unlikely to have occurred by chance. Varying exactly how many are picked out of how many photos doesn't seem to be a central issue any more. Perhaps what would be most helpful would be for knowledgeable folks to make suggestions about the appropriate controls to assure a valid experiment.

I done 2 trials by 10 runs in each.
In first I pulled out 2 out of 10, in second out of 10.
Here is the results. + mean exact hit, - in wrong and X mean correct but not in order.

So here is 10 tests with 2.

X X
+ -
+ +
X-
- -
+ -
X X
+ -
- -
X -


Here is the results with 3 out of 10.

+ - -
X + -
X X X
+ - -
X + -
+ X –
+ - +
- - X
- - -
- + -

Not the best results maybe, but honest. Out of two seem like with 2 I am better as sometimes while I go through the envelopes and I am forgetting what was the 1st that I pulled out.. cause trying to concentrate on what next and not to think about the one I pulled out. So I will practice tomorrow with 2 out of 10 will try to make 3 trials to see what are the results. But as I said over a weekend will do the same with my friend helping me, and also will try with 3 out of 10 as well, as now have some ideas that might help me to be more correct and less confusing.


Re to the conditions.. I would be fine with the ones I proposed in my propose with pairs and triples

 

[pavel_do]

Are there particular pictures that you find easy to identify?

For example, if you found a star card the easiest to see, wouldn't it be simpler to have ten envelopes, nine blank cards and you just find the star? Then just shuffle the cards and repeat? The multiple guesses on each shuffle seems to confuse the issue and make the odds harder to calculate. Finding a picture among blank cards should be even easier, right?

Well, yes there is some of the photos that usually I am seeing them bright and correct.. There was a similar offer before.. But to answer the questions about blank cards.. well I need to try this.. to know If I can or not. ( and I will do so) Just that I think if I will be looking for let say a Star.. I will be obviously repeat it in my mind and will try to see any hints of it.. and that can play bad game.. as my brain might start “drawing” for me…. Like when u think of something with your eyes closed.. and u sort of “see it..” I will try it any way… so I will know if it is would be simple for me.

Cause if it is working than we could put 2-3 photos among the rest “blank” …not 1, to make the odds more evident and that would require less “hits” per trial.

 

[TheBoyPaj]

But in your previous post you said that the multiple guesses per run was confusing you. Keep it simple. If you want to increase odds, pick out a picture from among 19 blank cards. Or 29.

And if you think repeating the same picture would mess you up, have different images. But still only have one picture card among blank cards. Then there's less risk of you mistaking one image for another.

 

[Crundy]

I done 2 trials by 10 runs in each.
In first I pulled out 2 out of 10, in second out of 10.
Here is the results. + mean exact hit, - in wrong and X mean correct but not in order.

So here is 10 tests with 2.

X X
+ -
+ +
X-
- -
+ -
X X
+ -
- -
X -


Here is the results with 3 out of 10.

+ - -
X + -
X X X
+ - -
X + -
+ X –
+ - +
- - X
- - -
- + -

Not the best results maybe, but honest. Out of two seem like with 2 I am better as sometimes while I go through the envelopes and I am forgetting what was the 1st that I pulled out.. cause trying to concentrate on what next and not to think about the one I pulled out. So I will practice tomorrow with 2 out of 10 will try to make 3 trials to see what are the results. But as I said over a weekend will do the same with my friend helping me, and also will try with 3 out of 10 as well, as now have some ideas that might help me to be more correct and less confusing.

Actually, against straight chance (if you were guessing) it looks like you did better taking three instead of two. Were you marking which picture you thought was in the envelope before you opened it, or did you put all three into a pile and say "pictures 1, 4, and 8 are in these three envelopes"?

Edit: Wait, ignore that. I didn't read about what '-' meant.

 

[TheBoyPaj]

I done 2 trials by 10 runs in each.
In first I pulled out 2 out of 10, in second out of 10.
Here is the results. + mean exact hit, - in wrong and X mean correct but not in order.

So here is 10 tests with 2.

X X
+ -
+ +
X-
- -
+ -
X X
+ -
- -
X -

I'm pretty sure that the JREF will only accept exact hits. I make that 5 hits out of 20 guesses. If you assume a 1/10 chance for each (ignoring the confusing factor of two guesses per "run") that's just a 1/23 chance. Not good.

Here is the results with 3 out of 10.

+ - -
X + -
X X X
+ - -
X + -
+ X –
+ - +
- - X
- - -
- + -

Better. 1/128
Still not a challenge winner, though.

(I used this page to calculate: http://faculty.vassar.edu/lowry/binomialX.html)

 

[Crundy]

Here is the results with 3 out of 10.

+ - -
X + -
X X X
+ - -
X + -
+ X –
+ - +
- - X
- - -
- + -

If you could get all three correct and in the right order (e.g. +++ in your example) four times out 10 then that should do it for the prelim. No idea about the odds though.

 

[pavel_do]

If you could get all three correct and in the right order (e.g. +++ in your example) four times out 10 then that should do it for the prelim. No idea about the odds though.

I have changed some photos.. and will practice now 2 runs by 1 out of 10, 2 out of 10 and 2 runs by 3 out of 10. Will post the results when I am done.

P.s. Runs I meaned a trials... 10 runs per each trial

 

[pavel_do]

I have changed some photos.. and will practice now 2 runs by 1 out of 10, 2 out of 10 and 2 runs by 3 out of 10. Will post the results when I am done.

P.s. Runs I meaned a trials... 10 runs per each trial

I had no chance to make the trials that I planed today. Just got back home, had to help my friend with his things. Will try to do it tomorrow. Also will try one new test to see what will happen. Just will need some calculations to see if it worth it.

 

[Akhenaten]

I admire your devotion to this Pavel, and even more I admire your willingness to take the advice that the clever people are offering. I hope you understand these odds calculations better than I do In any case, don't push yourself too hard with the tests.

I reckon you're going to get a lot out of your time here, regardless of how the test goes, and I look forward to discussing other odds and ends with you.

Back to matters at hand though, and you've made me curious about how you are able to read some pictures (by holding only) better than others. Have you noticed any pattern to this effect? Amongst the pictures that you train with, are there any in particular that you are usually able to identify? Also, I'm still a bit unsure about what happens if an envelope that you hold contains a blank sheet, although you may have already explained that. If so I'll have another read back through the thread.

It will be good if you can get your friend to help you with some tests. It must be very time consuming when you have to do everything yourself.

Good luck mate,

Dave


ETA: Sorry, I just noticed your answer to The BoyTaj about trying some blank cards. Disregard that bit

 

[pavel_do]

I admire your devotion to this Pavel, and even more I admire your willingness to take the advice that the clever people are offering. I hope you understand these odds calculations better than I do In any case, don't push yourself too hard with the tests.

I reckon you're going to get a lot out of your time here, regardless of how the test goes, and I look forward to discussing other odds and ends with you.

Back to matters at hand though, and you've made me curious about how you are able to read some pictures (by holding only) better than others. Have you noticed any pattern to this effect? Amongst the pictures that you train with, are there any in particular that you are usually able to identify? Also, I'm still a bit unsure about what happens if an envelope that you hold contains a blank sheet, although you may have already explained that. If so I'll have another read back through the thread.

It will be good if you can get your friend to help you with some tests. It must be very time consuming when you have to do everything yourself.

Good luck mate,

Dave


ETA: Sorry, I just noticed your answer to The BoyTaj about trying some blank cards. Disregard that bit

Hi Dave,
So to answer your questions.
I am really not sure exactly how do I “see” the photos, not sure that I “see” it with my skin as there is no direct contact due to the 2 envelopes that the photo in. Or that is more prediction due to my clairvoyance gift.. Not sure 100 %, what I think is that the photos some how is holding the information and has the sort of field of it… ”pattern” that some how can be recognized “read” by me. Sort of “3 d” picture of the picture that can be “touched” and recognized… I came to this test, after my practice with photos that people who come to me bring sometimes (of there relatives or friends) and by holding it I am able almost same as when person present, to “read” him. And it is best with normal photo, not printed on Xerox or something.. or photo from mobile phone that u can see on the screen. I don’t know if you know and most people know here on the thread that what I am usually do it “read” peoples life’s, destinies trying to see the solution and out comes to there problems as a Clairvoyant. I am not the funny guy who read photos in the envelopes as most people here take me… I will allow my self to post part of the Affidavit letter that I got from the academics that tested me at University.
“Comments
In addition to the good performance on the test of his claimed power, Pavel told us that his best talent is in providing readings about people’s past and future events. After the test, as the five of us sat around the table, Pavel provided readings for each of us as well as two of our graduate students. His accuracy and specificity in seeing major emotional events in our past was uncanny. He also made predictions about our futures. Some of these appear to have already come true. We are even more impressed by the readings he provided than the results of his formal test. It seems that this is where his best abilities lie. Also, in follow-up meetings with Pavel, we have been surprised at the level of detail he remembers about the readings he gave us and others in the room. It seems unlikely that a person making up readings about people would remember these things in such detail weeks later with no prompting and no notes (he did not take notes or any other form of recording of the readings during them).”

Some one would say.. why then I don’t claim this ability for the challenge.. well. That would be easier for me BUT, for the test the JREF would bring there people and I am not sure that those people would be honest in order to confirm the information that I will be telling them or deny it… as you never know.. but Million dollars is allot of money Plus.. another thing.. I always see what I see, I cant be forced to see specific thing.. and when I am forced in some way.. I am “closed” don’t know sort of self-defense subconsciously .. like when people use to bug me when I was younger to see this and that.. that was fun for the beginning and then just went too far.. most of talks was to see something for them so I wasn’t any more interested as just Pavel everyone wanted to know something and I wasn’t really happy to be needed just to answers questions... So I started sort of close my self in defense… and just don’t see when some one “pushes”… During my reading it is different in a way as I am willing to see things for them and open and they open.. still some times I don’t see and I am always honest, and honestly tell people that I don’t see.. What is the reason for that I don’t know .. maybe I shouldn’t know it or they.. What ever I see I am responsibly for it and for what I am saying to the people, so one of the 3 rules that I have and always say to a client before reading is.. I am keeping my right to not to say everything that I am seeing.. But always honestly, if I see I tell you what I see, when I don’t see I tell you I don’t see, and when I see and cant or think I shouldn’t say it.. I will tell you I see it but I can not say it…
Any way that is a bit out of subject…

So as I said I don’t really know how I see photos and neither how I am able to read people… But a few times I heard.. Ones in London from a client who is Professor also at University.. that there was and is a theory about “Know-sphere” ( not sure how to spell it) theory of academic Vernadskij and some other I am not sure but I think Einstein also mentioned it, the information filed that contain al the information.. sort of “book of life” and some how I am able to get there and get the information from there… I don’t know to be honest and dotn know exactly how does it work… and the thing that I am subconsciously sort of “closing” myself when I am “pushed” and like told to do it for demand not really helpful.

For the photos, yes there is some of them that am almost always right with and I will use them for a new test
I will make a few runs of it now and later will post the results and explain what is it about.

Regards,

Pavel

 

[pavel_do]

Hi guys,
I thought of a new test yesterday… and tried it and seem like the results are good enough to beat preliminary test… Here is what is it all about.
Out of all photos that I have there is a few that I am almost always right 5 that are different and can’t be confused with each other as have different shapes. Though this 5 cant be confused with each other but ca be confused with some others cause as I said already many times in one or the other way photos repeat each other with the shape, colors , texture etc.. cause there is basically just a few common shapes: pyramid.. round, square, crossed lines etc.. and because I don’t see all the time the same way and I see as a shapes, same colors and same some related pictures to the image that I hold.. and I see most of the time in different way for the same photo.. like holding photo of ship.. one time I see a water, the other shape of the ship another time it can be anchor or something elts related to the ship.
To make the story short.
I have 5 (actually 7) photos that are different by the most characteristics and most of the time I am right with them when I hold it and naming it basing my “guess” on the vision that I see..
So I got 5 photos I mixed them up, going through all of the and out of this 5 I pull out 2 that I am most sure of 5.
Here the results of yesterday test and 2 tests of today.
Same as last time + mean direct hit, - is wrong and X means in the wrong order.
I have made 10 runs per trial.
1st
+ +, + + , + - , x x, + +, + - ,+ +,+ + ,+ - ,+ +.


2nd
+ +, + -, + +, + +, x x, + +, + -, + +, + +, + -.

3d.
+ +, + +, - +, + +, X -, + +, + +, - -,+ +,- +.



The results are honest. I asked to make the calculations for me for this test, and seem like it is good enough to pass the preliminary test, plus it is not taking allot of time. And it is not too much photos and not too little as 2 So the odds of getting two out of 5 right is not as big as 50/50. To get 2 out of 5 and name them exactly is 1 in 20.

This test and my results seem good for me and comfortable, and to be honest it a bit inspired me as seems easy and not taking allot of time etc. I will drop all the others and will practice this on more and over weekend with my friend so to see the results if it all go well that I think it will I will prepare the proposal to JREF with this test and will send it first thing on Monday. ( Still I would need a minimum of 3 trails.. 10 runs per each trial.)
Any thought?? Ideas?? Comments? Yes I know most of you say.. like.. again new way to play coin toss hoping for chance blah blah blah… if I see I should see even out of 100 etc.. but as I said before many times and will say again.. if you see it better then me,.. than make it even 1 out of 1000 good luck
Have a nice day everybody.
Pavel

p.s. had to post results alined as in colomns they come all in one..

 

[Crundy]

I don't understand your protocol and results. Are you saying you're doing the same as before but with 5 photos instead of 10? So you take 5 photos, pick two you are sure of, and then open them? That sounds like worse odds than before.

I don't get the results table. Did you open 6/6 envelopes on each run? E.g. you got all 6 in the correct order on your first run?

 

[Startz]

Hi guys,
I thought of a new test yesterday… and tried it and seem like the results are good enough to beat preliminary test… Here is what is it all about.
>snip
To make the story short.
I have 5 (actually 7) photos that are different by the most characteristics and most of the time I am right with them when I hold it and naming it basing my “guess” on the vision that I see..
So I got 5 photos I mixed them up, going through all of the and out of this 5 I pull out 2 that I am most sure of 5.
Here the results of yesterday test and 2 tests of today.
Same as last time + mean direct hit, - is wrong and X means in the


I have made 10 runs per trial.
1st
+ +, + + , + - , x x, + +, + - ,+ +,+ + ,+ - ,+ +.


2nd
+ +, + -, + +, + +, x x, + +, + -, + +, + +, + -.

3d.
+ +, + +, - +, + +, X -, + +, + +, - -,+ +,- +.



>snip
This test and my results seem good for me and comfortable, and to be honest it a bit inspired me as seems easy and not taking allot of time etc. I will drop all the others and will practice this on more and over weekend with my friend so to see the results if it all go well that I think it will I will prepare the proposal to JREF with this test and will send it first thing on Monday. ( Still I would need a minimum of 3 trails.. 10 runs per each trial.)
Any thought?? Ideas?? Comments? Yes I know most of you say.. like.. again new way to play coin toss hoping for chance blah blah blah… if I see I should see even out of 100 etc.. but as I said before many times and will say again.. if you see it better then me,.. than make it even 1 out of 1000 good luck
Have a nice day everybody.
Pavel

p.s. had to post results alined as in colomns they come all in one..

Pavel:

For the proposal you have to be specific as to what counts as a succcess.

For example, I will attempt to identify 2 of 5 pictures in order. A run will consist of 10 such attempts and a success on a run will require 6 or more successful identifications. The preliminary challenge will consist of 3 such runs of 10. Success at one or more runs wins the preliminary challenge.

By the way, if you have time to post it I'm sure everyone would like to see the affidavit posted in its entirety.

 

[pavel_do]

I don't understand your protocol and results. Are you saying you're doing the same as before but with 5 photos instead of 10? So you take 5 photos, pick two you are sure of, and then open them? That sounds like worse odds than before.

I don't get the results table. Did you open 6/6 envelopes on each run? E.g. you got all 6 in the correct order on your first run?

Yes I use 5 instead of 10, yes the odds sort of worse but it easier for me and that what I think counts as in the end I still will (need) to beat 1000 odds.
I use 5 photos, out of which I pull out only 2 that I am sure of and then ONLY this 2 I name and Open, same procedure 10 times.
As to results.. had to align them..
So for the 1st trial. It is like this.. (each symbol is one envelope that was pulled, so + + mean both was correct and named exactly in order)
1st
+ +
+ +
+ -
x x
+ +
+ -
+ +
+ +
+ -
+ +
I had to align them cause when I post it ..the forum make it all in one table all three lines that in my post separate from each other ( I think there is “thread” mistake)

 

[IXP]

Probability = 8.1-e19

Someone could have started these tests at the beginning of the universe and never hit as many as you did by chance.

Please describe EXACTLY how the test is done. Give us step-by-step instructions so that we could repeat the test exactly. For example, here is how I would describe a hypothetical way of doing the test I think you described:

Materials: 5 highly distiguishable photographs, with a unique name for the image written on the back of each. 50 identical small envelopes. 50 identical Manila envelopes.

For each trial:

1. Each of the five photos is placed in a different small envelope and sealed.
2. These 5 small envelopes are shuffled sufficiently that I lose track of which is which.
3. Each of these small envelopes is placed in a different manila envelope and sealed.
4. The 5 manila envelopes are shuffled sufficiently that I lose track of which is which.
5. I hold each of the five sealed manila envelopes in turn, and choose the two that I get the strongest image on.
6. I write the name of the image on each of these two envelopes.
7. I open the two envelopes and their inner envelopes and count a hit if the name on the outer envelope matches the name on the photo inside the inner envelope.
8. I open all of the rest of the envelopes and discard them.

Ten trials are done by repeating the above steps using new envelopes each time.


IXP

 

[pavel_do]

Pavel:

For the proposal you have to be specific as to what counts as a succcess.

For example, I will attempt to identify 2 of 5 pictures in order. A run will consist of 10 such attempts and a success on a run will require 6 or more successful identifications. The preliminary challenge will consist of 3 such runs of 10. Success at one or more runs wins the preliminary challenge.

By the way, if you have time to post it I'm sure everyone would like to see the affidavit posted in its entirety.

Thank you, will do my best to make it as specific and detailed as possible.

 

[pavel_do]

Probability = 2.8e-31

Someone could have started these tests at the beginning of the universe and never hit as many as you did by chance.

Please describe EXACTLY how the test is done. Give us step-by-step instructions so that we could repeat the test exactly. For example, here is how I would describe a hypothetical way of doing the test I think you described:

Materials: 5 highly distiguishable photographs, with a unique name for the image written on the back of each. 50 identical small envelopes. 50 identical Manila envelopes.

For each trial:

1. Each of the five photos is placed in a different small envelope and sealed.
2. These 5 small envelopes are shuffled sufficiently that I lose track of which is which.
3. Each of these small envelopes is placed in a different manila envelope and sealed.
4. The 5 manila envelopes are shuffled sufficiently that I lose track of which is which.
5. I hold each of the five sealed manila envelopes in turn, and choose the two that I get the strongest image on.
6. I write the name of the image on each of these two envelopes.
7. I open the two envelopes and their inner envelopes and count a hit if the name on the outer envelope matches the name on the photo inside the inner envelope.
8. I open all of the rest of the envelopes and discard them.

Ten trials are done by repeating the above steps using new envelopes each time.


IXP

Thank you very much!
Seems like my protocol is almost ready… (if you don’t mind using your wordings)
Well that the way it should go.. with just a few things.. I would need a minimum 3 trials in this way..
And though it all go the way you described, but I don’t open the rest of the envelopes, after the one I named and matched. The others remain sealed.. I just place photos back to the envelopes ( carefully in order to not to mark them in any way with bands, crease etc) and reshuffling them and use again… I have only 5 photos and 10 envelopes (5 each).

 

[IXP]

Thank you very much!
Seems like my protocol is almost ready… (if you don’t mind using your wordings)
Well that the way it should go.. with just a few things.. I would need a minimum 3 trials in this way..
And though it all go the way you described, but I don’t open the rest of the envelopes, after the one I named and matched. The others remain sealed.. I just place photos back to the envelopes ( carefully in order to not to mark them in any way with bands, crease etc) and reshuffling them and use again… I have only 5 photos and 10 envelopes (5 each).

That is exactly what I expected, you are using the same pictures in the same envelopes each time. This is no good. You could easily be determining the photo by some subtle differences in the envelopes. You might even be doing this unconsciously.

You have to either use new envelopes each time (this could get expensive!) or at least, take out all the photos and replace them randomly with lot's of shuffling so you don't know which photo goes into which envelope, or better, have a friend shuffle them and re-place them in the envelopes out of your sight.

IXP