Vision From Feeling

[Jackalgirl]

I have not had a scientific test of my ability yet since that is something that needs to be arranged with an impartial and credible party.

Welcome to the Forum!

Let me suggest that your best bet is to come up with a test of your abilities, the result of which is self-evident.

What you do NOT want is a test that requires someone to judge that you are or are not successful.

By having a test in which the results are self-evident, the partiality and credibility of the witness is less important -- in fact, what you end up is with someone who is a witness, not a judge, which is the point.

So here's what I'd recommend -- a "dry run" test that you can do with two friends based on Maldach's suggestion. This is not a very tight protocol in terms of controlling for trickery, and the IIG will want something tighter. But it gets you in the neighborhood.

Requirements:
You, Friend A, Friend B (each friend has a notepad)
Three small beakers
Hot water dispenser* with hot distilled water in it
Three measuring teaspoons
Three stirrers (glass stirring sticks are fine)
Table salt
Baking soda
Powdered alum
Sharpie
Three 1" x 1" pieces of paper
Roll of removable tape
one six-sided die
Tube of Ben-Gay, mentholated cream, or some other very strong-smelling substance.
Three rooms (Prep room, Preparer waiting room, VFF waiting room)

*I am envisioning one of those dispensing thingies that have a button on the top that you use to "pump" hot water into a cup. I haven't the slightest what they're called.

While you and friend A (from here out, the observer) wait in the VFF waiting room, Friend B (from here out, the preparer) goes into the prep room, where all of the equipment except for the tube of strong-smelling stuff is located (that is in the VFF waiting room). The preparer rolls one six-sided dice:

On a roll of 1-2, the preparer starts with salt, taking a leveled spoon of salt and mixing it into x oz of hot water* until it is completely dissolved. This preparation is labelled "1" using the Sharpie, one of the tags, and the tape, and the preparer annotates the number/substance correlation on a notepad. The teaspoon and stirring stick are set aside, not to be used again.

On a roll of 3-4 the preparer does the same as above, but starts with baking soda.

On a roll of 5-6, the prepare does the same as above, but starts with alum.

Once the first beaker is prepared, the preparer rolls the die again. On 1-3, the next preparation will: baking soda if the first item was salt, alum if the first item was baking soda, salt if the first item was alum. On 4-6, the next preparation will be: alum if the first item was salt, salt if the first item was baking soda, baking soda if the first item was alum. The solution is prepared as before (with a new teaspoon and stirring stick), this beaker being labeled "2" and number/preparation recorded on the preparer's notepad. Again, the measuring spoon and stirring stick are set aside.

The preparer then prepares the last beaker with the remaining substance using a new teaspoon and stirring stick and labels it "3", recording the result on his or her notepad.

The preparer leaves the room, taking his/her notepad, and knocks on the VFF door in passing, going to the Preparer waiting room.

VFF and the observer wait 30 seconds to allow the Preparer to get into his/her waiting room. VFF and her observer both apply a bit of the strong smelling stuff underneath their nose, then she and her observer go into the Prep room. VFF does whatever she needs to do in order to determine which beaker contains which solution short of actually tasting or smelling the solution. The observer records the results. VFF and the observer return to the VFF waiting room.

*where "x" is a reasonable amount to allow for solution without allowing the contents to be exceptionally smelly. Perhaps we'll need to go with 1/4 tsp or something -- VFF will need to indicate the minimal amount of substance she needs to be in the water in order for her ability to work.

A couple of notes:

Someone smarter than I in stats is going to have to figure out some stuff, such as how changing the die rolls from 1-2 in the first determination to 1-3 on the second changes the situation (if at all). Also, a stats person would need to tell you how many times you'd have to repeat this single run in order to get statistically significant success (all three right in how many repeats? Two out of three in how many repeats? One in three in how many repeats?). You'd actually end up needing more beakers, teaspoons, and stirrers if you had to repeat each run, since you'd want to use clean equipment each time.

Also, for a tighter protocol, you'll need a third friend: one to prepare the beakers (and write down which ones contained which, without labeling, left-to-right), a second to label the beakers left-to-right with a randomly-determined number or letter (and record which number/letter goes with which beaker, left-to-right), and your observer. If the person labeling the beakers does not know which container has what substance in it, he or she can't give away (purposefully or accidentally) which is why by changing the way they're labeled. Of course, this person would need to have the smelly stuff applied under his/her nose too.

Anyway -- try this out once and let us know how it turns out. Are you able to get all three correctly identified?

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

UncaYimmy:

I agree that it is a good idea to test oneself before having an official paranormal test. If only there were people with health problems available for a pre-test I could have one with the health information. The experience and success I have so far on identifying health information has already convinced me that it is worth the time and effort of me and the testing party to have the test.

Do you seriously want me to use my ability on persons in the bathroom? Do you have any idea of the things that I can see? I would prefer to respect their privacy and not try this. While we're on the subject, I love to tell people when they need to go to the bathroom. It is not visible externally, but I can feel it. I can also see the composition of urine and the contents of the stomach and intestines and am learning to decipher this into what a person ate. It does not bother me at all. One of the clearest things to see that a person ate, is a meal composed mostly of sucrose (tablesugar), and another one is a meal composed mostly of fat.

One might ask themselves, why would a person who is able to see inside the human body, actually spend time looking into a human body? In the very beginning when I realized this ability of seeing inside the human body, I was naturally apalled and uncomfortable with what I saw, but over the years I have learned to truly appreciate human tissues to the point where it is one of the passions in my life today and I can't wait to study histology (human tissues) in graduate school and work with tissues. I could talk on and on about the beautiful structures that I've seen in the human body, and the information I receive from viewing them. It is just wonderful. Humans are beautiful.

I already know that I benefit from seeing the person that I am viewing. Seeing the person should also not pose a problem for the sake of the test since there is plenty of information to test on that is indetectable from the outside with no external cues. I would like to mention some of these, which are not necessarily going to be involved in my test with the IIG:

The presence of infectious bacteria, their type and location / Lung cancer / Removed lobes of the lung / Asthma, allergies, the presence of asthma medicine still on the trachea from the past / Pregnancy / Female cysts of the reproductive system / Prostate cancer / Breast cancer / Stomach ulcers / Pain, a description of its extent and location and the tissues involved as well as its cause / Damages to the normal alignment and structures of the spine / Bone fractures that did not heal properly (can be concealed by clothes) / Contents in urine / Liver worm, parasites / Blood composition / Kidney stones / Gall stones / Liver damage, cirrhosis, holes in the liver tissue, damage from alcohol or infection / Damaged appendix / Colon cancer / Mental illness, may show as dark areas on the brain’s electrical activity / Tinnitus / Obscured vision / Discomforts of all forms in the body, their location and a description of

And many more. I like to use my ability when I get the chance since it is improved by practice. When possible I like to check what I find with the person and so far my accuracy has been excellent. I treat the persons and the information I obtain with respect for the person's integrity and privacy.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Jackalgirl:

Thank you for a well thought-of test protocol. I will try something similar to it when I find the time, and once I do I will remember to post the results here, what ever the results may be. However instead of having only a specific amount of substances randomly distributed among three beakers, I would like to make it more interesting by having so that the substances in the beakers could be any. For instance, two might be baking soda, and one be table salt. Or even with an option that a beaker might not have any substance added to it and contains only water. This would of course be randomly selected with the dice.

The word you were looking for is thermos.

 

[Jackalgirl]

Thank you for a well thought-of test protocol. I will try something similar to it when I find the time, and once I do I will remember to post the results here, what ever the results may be. However instead of having only a specific amount of substances randomly distributed among three beakers, I would like to make it more interesting by having so that the substances in the beakers could be any. For instance, two might be baking soda, and one be table salt. Or even with an option that a beaker might not have any substance added to it and contains only water. This would of course be randomly selected with the dice.

I don't have any problem with that -- the important thing is that they're all prepared in the same way, with the same solvent and same quantity of substance. I like your idea that one of the beakers have water only in it. I think this would end up decreasing the number of trials you'd have to do in order to hit the required odds (for the JREF MDC, it's generally 1:1000, depending on the situation -- I'm not sure what the IIG's requirements are).

The other important thing, of course, is that the whole process be double-blind, and that you control for any normal ways a person might identify what's what (for example, by smell, or by touch if there's a significant tactile difference between solutions).

The word you were looking for is thermos.

Thermos is actually a brand name, tho I'm sure they make what I'm talking about. Here is an example list of these beverage dispensers.

I'm looking forward to finding out the details & results of your testing!

 

[Uncayimmy]

Do you seriously want me to use my ability on persons in the bathroom? Do you have any idea of the things that I can see? I would prefer to respect their privacy and not try this.

Yes, I am serious. When I'm in a stall, I can't help but hear someone enter the bathroom and subsequently the stall next to me. I hear if they pull out the paper to put on the seat. Not to be crude, but I may hear other, ahem, noises. If the person is a smoker, unclean, or wearing cologne, I'll probably smell them. If you could see illnesses within my body through a bathroom stall door, I wouldn't feel my privacy was invaded.

You used the metaphor about how once you learn to read you can't help but see words when you look at a printed page.

So, can you prevent yourself from "seeing" these people? Is it a matter of focus, like straining to see a distant object or hear a conversation over the background noise?

Really, what I am driving at is whether you have tested your skills through a solid barrier and with people you have never seen before.

 

[roger]

Super easy test - you can do this in 10 minutes with a few friends. It's not conclusive, but should yield interesting results.

You claim you can feel what people are eating. The test. Take some coffee cups. Fill sone with hot water, some with cold. The person drinks from one randomly, and you say whether the water was hot or cold.

It's not conclusive since you may be able to tell just from body language which they are drinking, or if the water is too hot it will be steaming, etc. But it'd be a really easy, fun way to test this out.

Edit: you could change this in a number of ways. Instead of hot/cold, you could dissolve sugar in some, and leave the other plain - less likely to get a flinch or whatever from hot water. But I hope you get the idea - the liquids are clear, so you can watch (so long as you don't know which coffee cup contains which liquid, of course!).

edit2: I relooked at your site, and see you claim you can taste food by looking at it. This makes the test even simplier. Have your friend dissolve sugar in half the cups, salt in the rest. Say, 10 cups. Then you look at each and say what is dissolved in it.

 

[Hokulele]

To take roger's test a bit further, have a room with a table, one pitcher of sugar water, one of salt water, one of plain water, and 15 paper cups. Have someone pour one cup of each and taste to make sure you can tell them apart when you know which is which.

Leave the room, and have the other person label 12 paper cups with the numbers 1-12. They should then roll a 6-sided die, and if the number is 1 or 2, fill the first cup with sugar water, 3 or 4, salt water, and 5 or 6, plain water. Repeat for all 12 cups, and they should keep a record of which type of water went into each cup. They will then take the record and leave the room.

You can then enter the room and have someone else record what type of water you think is in each of the cups just by looking.

There are a bunch of other controls that would need to be put in place for this to be a true challenge protocol, but it is good enough for you to test yourself.

 

[JWideman]

My first post in this thread referred to your "ice cream test". Anyone can tell what someone else is eating if they look at them, sheesh. Or at least are near enough to smell what they're eating and have a good sense of smell. That you have your senses rearranged so that you feel and see smells is medically interesting, but not at all paranormal.


Neurologist Richard Cytowic (Synesthesia: A Union of the Senses, The Man Who Tasted Shapes) identifies the following diagnostic criteria of synesthesia:
1. Synesthetic images are spatially extended, meaning they often have a definite "location." (But not necessarily in the right locations)
2. Synesthesia is involuntary and automatic.
3. Synesthetic percepts are consistent and generic (i.e. simple rather than imagistic).
4. Synesthesia is highly memorable.
5. Synesthesia is laden with affect.

I'm not a neurologist, but doesn't this sound familiar to you? It only seems like a sixth sense because you are observing everything in a more obvious way. I knew someone who saw motion as colors and it allowed her to interpret body language very easily, to the point where she'd know if someone was lying.
Enjoy your colorful, but mundane, life. Do something creative with it, like painting.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

UncaYimmy:

Thank you for commenting. From my experience I still believe that I need to see the person at least partially, as if seeing a part of the body lets me access and download the vibrational information of the entire body. There are still many observations that I have made that come with no external signs, such as detecting the presence of a supplement of the "friendly" bacteria that people take to balance the ecosystem of their digestive system. What someone ate. The electrical activity field of the brain. Cysts in the female reproductive system. And so much more. Although I realize that using a screen would be very beneficial for the sake of a test, I am reluctant to use a screen since it should not be absolutely necessary when testing on the appropriate ailments and since my ability works the best when I can see the object or person in question.

I also want to have a test that more closely resembles what my most frequent everyday experience is with this ability, and that is to find information about people, and without a screen. My ability grows with experience, so this is what I have the most experience and skill with.

My ability is always active, but when I am focused on something else I am not aware of the ability. It is like when you are working on something and there is music playing in the background, you have moments where you do not hear the music at all because you are not paying attention to it and have your mind focused on something else at that time. When I am not doing anything in particular the ability is active and I receive the information. I can choose to focus it at times when I want to obtain information with it, just like when you really want to hear music you can focus and listen to it. I test my ability on people I haven't seen all the time. Most of the time though I am unable to check my observations with them since you do not approach a stranger and say, "By the way, do you have colon cancer?"

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

When the testing has been done by Independent Investigators Group, can someone start a new thread with the results? I only have a finite amount of time and cannot spend much of it on so many posts claiming so many various wonderful things. Let me know the proof.

Thank you.

 

[roger]

I'm sorry, but you claim that you want to find out if you really have these abilities, yet don't want to do the very simple tests to prove it.

I know I taste with my tongue. It's so easily proved. I put food in my mouth, I taste it. I've mistakenly put salt in my coffee, and as soon as I tasted it, I knew. etc. That you are questioning whether you have these abilities(tasting by seeing) is a big red flag. That you think you are 'better' at very difficult things like seeing cysts in a body than tasting salt vs sugar, is another big red flag.

These claims are so easyto test. You can see through tissue. Fine. Have somebody put their hands behind their back with one quarter. They put the quarter in either their left or right, then hold them in front of you. You look through the hand and see the quarter. You should be able to do this 100%, with stranger or friend. I predict you will come back and give some reason as to why you can't do this. If so, I suggest looking deeply and honestly at your reaction. Why is it all these easy things to verify you can't do, but the things that can't easily be verified you think you can do? There's a pretty obvious answer to that, if you think about it. OTOH, if you undertake a test like this, awesome, let us know how it goes!

 

[Ocelot]

For three solutions randomly ordered, there are 6 permutations. Therefore a one in 6 chance of guessing correctly through chance alone.

If you succeeded in doing this in each of four trials that would be seen as sufficient for the JREF preliminary test. You'd only have one chance in 1296 of succeeding through chance alone. Although the protocol would have to be tightened substantially to avoid other means of detecting the difference seeing bubbles or differences in meniscus, - that sort of thing. I'd suggest fully sealed containers with no airspace.

If we include plain water then we have four solutions. 24 permutations and therefore only a one in 24 chance of guessing correctly through chance alone. In this instance 3 trials would be sufficient for the JREF preliminary test. You'd only have one chance in 13,824 of guessing these all correctly through chance alone.

You might think that against such huge odds some leeway might be allowed. however the odds of getting 10 or more are one in 750(ish) (getting 11 would be impossible - with permutation one wrong means getting at least one other wrong too)
Whilst one in 750 is certainly impressive the traditional passmark in JREF test has always been one in 1000 and this just falls short.

It's possible to achieve the desired probability much quicker with the slightly different test design you mention. In Jackagirl's protocol she's giving you information. She's telling you that in each batch of solutions to be identified there's exactly one of each type.

By the way if that is the route to be taken it might be simpler to draw tokens from a bag than use dice.

If instead as you suggested a number solutions were prepared each entirely at random with no regard to what previous solutions had been prepared we'd have far more possible permutations, including such freaks as all being plain water or the first three being salt and the rest baking soda.

In this instance just five solutions would be sufficient, there'd be a one in 1024 chance of guessing all 5 correctly through chance alone.

Ten is a nice round number. If each of the ten unidentified liquids could independently be any of four options, then the pass mark would be 8/10 correct. There'd be a one in 2405 chance of getting that through simple guessing.

With 5 options the passmark drops to 7/10

With 8 options to choose from the passmark drops to 6/10

Hok's test 12 cups each randomly containing on of three independant options would have a passmark of 10/12 Odds of getting ten or better through guessing are 1 in 1839.

That seems like the simplest to try on your own (well with friends to blind the test) but rememebr that if it does work and you change your mind want to apply for the million, sealed glass containers will probably be one of the many changes you'll need to make to the protocol before it would be accepted.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

roger:
Thank you for suggesting some good ways to test my ability. I will try some of them when I find the time. They are easy to arrange, and I agree that they can not prove an ability but could indicate if I do not seem to have extrasensory perception after all.

Hokulele:
Good suggestions, thank you.

JWideman:
Regarding the ice-cream test, I was looking at my friend's shoulder and back of the neck and shielded my vision with my hand to make sure that I had no view of his face or of the ice-cream. I try to ensure that I am not cheating intentionally or unintentionally in my personal little tests since that would lead nowhere. I do not think I was near enough to smell the difference between plain ice-cream, with pineapple, with chokolate, or no ice-cream. All of these scents would have continuously blended together from the cup I believe. I was aware of myself as sensing the electrical signals of his nerves as he experienced the temperature, texture, and flavor in his mouth. His brain translates these signals into the corresponding information, and it seemed as if I was accessing these electrical signals across the air in between us, and my brain could translate these signals into the same corresponding information as well. However I was not feeling a real sensation of ice-cream in my mouth like he was, I was only perceiving the sensory information in my mind.

This is not an implausible explanation. When people eat food, there are many little signal receptors on the tongue and in the cheeks that respond to the stimuli of pressure and of the shape of molecules, which creates electric signals just as if you would press a button to connect an electrical circuit or press a switch on an electronic device. The nerves in the human body operate through electricity which is nearly identical to the principles of electricity in electronic technology such as computers, or lightbulbs. Electricity is when little particles that have electrostatic charge in themselves move about. In the electrical wires on technical devices, these charged particles are the electrons, and electricity is when these electrons move about in the wires. In the human body, however, these charged particles are much larger ones, such as calcium ions, sodium ions, or chloride ions, but it is the same principle: electricity happens when these ions move about.

Charged particles always have an electrical field around them. This electrical field is like a parallel to a gravitational field. It is the extent to which the charged particles can exert attractive, or repulsive, forces on other charged particles, across that field, and across air and space. A gravitational field is when a mass can exert attractional forces on other masses, and likewise, the gravitational field exists across air and space. These invisible force-fields, such as gravitational, electric, or magnetic fields, decrease in strength with increasing distance from the source. When charged particles are moved about physically in their position, it causes their electrical field to move along with them, causing a moving electrical field. (Which by the way generates a magnetic field.)

All of you probably hate me by now for making this a science lecture, but this involves some of my favorite topics that I am specializing in.

The electrical signals that happen in the mouth as a reaction to stimuli from food, carry the information that can be translated into the taste, the food's location in the mouth, the texture, and temperature. Nerves are like the electrical wires in the body and send the electrical signal to the brain. In the brain the signals are distributed to their various specific destinations where one will stimulate the experience of flavor, another part of the brain is stimulated to make the experience of the temperature, and so on. Different sensory experiences are stored in the brain. Some sensory experiences are probably complex ones composed of a combination of different components of experiences connected together. When these experience-storages are stimulated through the nerves and the electrical signals, they activate and give you the conscious perception of the sensation that they hold.

The electrical signals of the nerves, as well as the electrical fields that surround the charged particles that are responsible for the electrical signals, are not exactly private or fully contained within the body. Electrical fields stretch out far around their sources, even if with diminishing strength as you increase in distance. There are many scientific and medical instruments that register the electricity of the human body, and that try to decode these into the information that it represents.

It is not implausible that the electrical aspect of the sensory stimulus to food extends out from a human being, reaches me, and is perceived by my brain and translated into the food experience. This is one possible way of trying to understand the process behind this phenomenon, but obviously not necessarily the truth of it.

By the way, another aspect of the ability is that I perceive what others perceive from their point of view. I can tell the difference in how the same taste is experienced by me or by another person, since there is some subjectivity involved in how different people experience the same things. So perhaps I am in fact perceiving their perception and signals once it has reached their brain. Or both from the mouth as the information is created, as well as from the brain.

Many aspects of my ability have similarity to synesthesia, which is why I suggest it as the alternative explanation to it being extrasensory perception. However, like I've said, I make observations that would not seem likely to be made with ordinary senses or even with ordinary synesthesia. For instance when I see and feel the presence of specific bacteria that are hidden in the body there is no vision, touch, taste, scent, or sound from its presence that would have been perceived by ordinary senses to be translated by synesthesia. Synesthesia takes information that is perceived through ordinary senses, and then translates that into corresponding aspects of other forms of perception. I believe I am perceiving the vibrational aspect of the bacteria which in itself is extrasensory perception. That is then translated through what is similar to synesthesia, but the original information that started the whole thing was inaccessible to ordinary senses or ordinary synesthesia.

I am not convinced that this would not involve some form of extrasensory perception, therefore I will continue with having the test.

Thank you for your comments.

Gord in Toronto:
I will try to remember to start a new thread to discuss the results of my test with the IIG once that is completed.

roger:
I can access many different types of information with this ability. The type of information that I have by far the most experience with, is dealing with information about human health. It might seem like this should be more difficult to do with any ability, but this is where I have most of the experience which is why my official paranormal test will involve health problems. I am less successful with chemical identification, where less successful refers to the frequency of observations, whereas the accuracy is still good. I am going to test my ability on chemical identification on my own but still have the official test on health information.

I do not question whether I have these abilities. It is more of the case that I am trying to be scientific and humble about it. I am quite aware of what I am perceiving, but I realize that I have to be open-minded about it since it concerns something that is unusual to most people.

Seeing a cyst is a lot easier to me than perceiving the taste information of sugar in water by feeling its vibrational aspect. A cyst comes with a strong feeling of dissonance among the other vibrational information across the human body. It feels out of place and mismatched, and clearly stands out so that I can detect that there is "something there", and that something translates into the visual perception of a cyst. In the case of sugar in water, there is nothing wrong with it. The water doesn't mind having sugar in it, so I have to work harder to look. Health problems are very easy to detect due to the dissonance associated with it. Imagine if you had to skim through a big book to search a specific word within the text. You would have to read it word by word, page after page to find it. Then imagine if the word was highlighted for you, how much easier that would be. That is what the difference between a cyst, and just sugar, is like. Much easier.

To sense a quarter involves sensing something where nothing is "wrong". There is nothing "wrong" with having a quarter in the hand. It would still be easier to detect a cyst. Don't make assumptions on what should be easier to detect or what the ability should be able to do - let me tell you what is the easiest and what it can do.

I am not opposed to failing a test and would not take it personally. Whether this is a form of synesthesia or ESP in either case it is what it is and I continue to use it and to enjoy the benefits of it, and I do not favor one label over the other.

Chemical identification would be easier for test purposes, but to make it easier on my ability I would prefer the official test to test it on what it is the strongest at. I am however interested in testing it on chemical identification as well and will post the results here as soon as that is done.

Ocelot:
Thank you, I will try a test similar to that. Still, my test with the IIG will concern health information since that is where my ability is the strongest.

Health information: high frequency of observations, high accuracy.
Chemical identification: low frequency of observations, high accuracy.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Vibrational algebra

Something I do with this ability is vibrational algebra to compute brand new information.
Everything has a vibrational aspect to it. The vibrational aspect is the deepest and most fundamental aspect that I know of. It is even deeper and more fundamental than the aspect of atoms. Most if not all of the properties of things can be attributed to properties of the atoms that make the things. Weight, color, structure, are all properties because of the atoms that make it. But, on a more fundamental level it is in fact the vibrational level that determines the weight, color, or structure, since the vibrational level is what determines the atoms.

I can access and download the vibrational information of things with my mind. This combines and wraps up all the relevant individual pieces of vibration of all the components that make the thing. For instance if I am observing a bacteria, the vibration that corresponds to the entire body of the bacteria, all of the chemicals and atoms that it consists of, is perceived as one combined vibrational aspect of the bacteria. The individual components of the thing all seem to be connected together so that they can be perceived together as a sum. So, rather than just seeing a whole big bunch of vibrations floating all over the place in the body, the vibrations are actually already neatly organized for me into compartments for all of the individual things that there are. I can download the complete vibrational aspect of each cell at a time, or each structure or thing at a time, and I do not have to try to gather all the relevant vibrations together. It is like rather than finding a bunch of un-stapled papers all over the place that you would have to pick up one by one and try to sort according to subject, they have already been neatly organized and piled up for you.

What decides how to determine the boundaries of things, for instance one cell from the others? Well, actually the entire human body can be perceived all together as one composite vibrational aspect. Or, I can find an organ and consider it being one vibrational aspect. Or a cell, or a structure, or even a chemical, or an individual atom. But relevant and adjoining things are linked together and their vibrational aspects are easy to perceive in combination.

This is why when if I find one cancer cell, through this kind of automatic compiling of relevant vibrations, I can find other such cancer cells in other locations of the body. Or, when I sense an illness that comes with symptoms in more than one part of the body and symptoms of different kinds, they are also linked together vibrationally so that I perceive all of them together as one thing, and do not have to search the body for relevant information that relates to what I found.

When I've downloaded the vibrational aspect of a bacteria for instance, I can use this information with algebra in my mind. ILLNESS + CURE = HEALTHY Well, since I know what the illness feels like, not just the bacteria itself but all of the adjoining tissues and reactions that are related to it, and I know what healthy feels like, doing algebra to find that HEALTHY - ILLNESS = CURE By superimposing the vibrational aspect of the illness with the vibrational aspect of the healthy body, the vibrational aspects combine on their own and in my mind I am looking at a brand new vibrational aspect that did not come from observations, but that I can then take and translate into its corresponding structure and the things that it represents.

I can compare the result with my past experiences of things to find the match. My favorite example, that I have yet to test in a lab, is that Helicobacter which causes stomach ulcers, can be destroyed with Calcium Carbonate, and from a preliminary point of view this is interesting enough to test.

I can also do addition. By adding the vibrational aspect of an unknown medicine that I am looking at and adding it to the vibrational aspect of a human body, I can observe the vibrational aspect of their combination and translate it into what the effects of that medicine is on the body. I have had amazing results.

I once looked at an unknown pill. I felt its vibrational aspect and combined it with the vibrational aspect of a human body in general to observe the results. I felt that the medicine is in fact a dangerous liver-toxin, and that the body responds with panic by flushing it out of the body and the kidneys with absolutely heaps of water, to the point of nearly dehydrating itself just to get rid of it. The only possible benefit of this process that I could think of, was that it might be a diuretic. And surely it was. If I had access to prescription drugs and a pharmacy, I would love to try a test on medicines! Medicines have very strong vibrational aspects compared to most naturally occurring substances since the structures of medicines look and feel very artificial and abnormal in many cases. And since I can combine them with the feeling of the body, I can make additional observations that provide strong clues as to what they are. This is something that is more difficult to do with other chemicals or materials such as coins.

I don't know whether I can do more complicated math with these vibrational aspects, so please don't ask me to try multiplication, division, logarithms, exponentials or Taylor expansions on these things!

 

[Hokulele]

It does not matter how something is done until it is proven it can be done.

I strongly recommend you spend more energy divising and taking a test to show you have a talent before speculating how such a talent might work.

 

[Madalch]

I don't know whether I can do more complicated math with these vibrational aspects, so please don't ask me to try multiplication, division, logarithms, exponentials or Taylor expansions on these things!

I wouldn't ask you to do anything more complicated than tell various colourless solutions apart by sight alone. I don't see the point in trying to set up health-related tests (which are subjective and difficult to set up) before doing the simple chemical-based ones.

You claimed that you could tell that a particular compound was biphenyl just by looking at it, and that the other two samples contained nitrogen. So it should be simple to tell salt from sugar when they're dissolved in water- they have no elements in common (apart from those in the water). Try that before booking an extensive trial with IIG.

 

[JWideman]

Ever hear of mirror-touch synesthesia? What you describe, perceiving things from another's point of view, sounds similar.
The simplest explanation is that you have synesthesia, and it can explain most of your experiences. The part it can't explain, perceiving what can't be detected by normal senses, has another explanation. You state you have a high accuracy detecting these things. But how often are you able to check yourself? With health issues, obviously, not often at all. This leads to what we call confirmation bias - you forget all the times you've been wrong. Plus you have no way of knowing whether you were right or wrong much of the time.
I'll accept that you are able to recognize a given chemical provided it has clues - such as odor - that your synesthesia can turn into something easy to spot. Just like I'd have perfect pitch if I could see colors when hearing music. There's nothing paranormal about this. But when you look at someone, your synesthesia is turning a variety of subtle clues into obvious ones, and you're mistakenly associating these things with health issues. These subtle clues can be anything - facial expressions, body language, body odor, anything at all. Stuff that most people may not notice, but having it translated to a color must make it very obvious.

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Hokulele:
Agreed, until my ability is understood then all of my opinions about it are just speculations. I still think this is interesting no matter what it turns out to be and I do not mind describing and sharing it with you.

Madalch:
I will try a simpler test, still I want the official test to involve health information.

JWideman:
I understand that a possible explanation is synesthesia, yet I have made observations that are not consistent with synesthesia, that have no externally observable signs that I could think of. This is significant, and I will proceed with having a test on identification of health problems.

What would you suggest that the external signs are for detecting the presence of Lactobacillus in the stomach? I can't think of any, although that doesn't mean that there are none. Any ideas?

I would remember if I had been wrong, and I have not been wrong yet. It is difficult for me to share my past experiences with this ability with you since none of you have experienced this with me, so let's just find out what the test results are with the IIG and then discuss this further.

 

[Professor Yaffle]

What would you suggest that the external signs are for detecting the presence of Lactobacillus in the stomach? I can't think of any, although that doesn't mean that there are none. Any ideas?

Can you just tell us how you confirmed for yourself that you were able to detect lactobacillus in the stomach. How was your judgement confirmed in the cases when you detected it?

 

[VisionFromFeeling]

Professor Yaffle:

One day when I met a friend of mine I was stunned because there was something highly unusual about him. I couldn't even say hi to him but kept looking at his stomach with suspicion. I was seeing his stomach (that is, the stomach organ), which was empty and looked very common in itself, with the gray-brownish color of its tissue along with some red from the hydrogen ions from the stomach acid, but there was something bright, bright white sitting near the pyloric valve, which is the entrance region between the stomach toward the intestines. I kept looking at this thing. It was circular and neither fully round or flat, and had a very strong and clearly-defined external casing. I told him that I see a living organism in his stomach, yet when I checked its vibrational aspect it was not disturbing the stomach in any way, which is suspicious since the stomach detects many types of bacteria and responds with discomfort. I described to him that I see a bright white little bacteria, yet that it was doing no harm or even intending to do harm, which is unusual for bacteria. He then told me that he was taking a supplement of Lactobacillus after a stomach problem, and I immediately realized that that was what it was.

About a year before this I was at the food store walking through the cereal aisle when I suddenly had to come to a halt and stop at a cereal box. I had never seen such a bright, bright white vibrational aspect of something little and roundish, with such a clearly defined outer casing, such an intensely bright vibrational aspect, and sitting inside a cereal box! I picked up the box and read carefully - turns out it contained Lactobacillus. Who would have known.

Lactobacillus is an incredible little thing. So, in both cases I had no way of expecting to come across it, and had it confirmed. What is also interesting is that I recognize it in the identical way whether it is in a person or in a cereal box.

And I know what you are all going to say: Just take some cereal, some plain and some with Lactobacillus, and see if you can feel the difference through a cereal box-type of material. Thanks I will try it.