Randonauting: Attractors, Voids, and Some High Octane…

Randonauting: Attractors, Voids, and Some High Octane…

by Joseph P. Farrell, Giza Death Star
July 8, 2020

 

…and now for something completely different.

In fact, it’s so different that when I read this article shared by G.B., I realized that I’d never heard of this before. That’s saying something for a hack from South Dakota who specializes in “strange stuff.” And in reading the article, I feel as if I’ve stepped into the pages of an Isaac Asimov Foundation series science fiction novel as a character in some sort of strange Asimovian post mortem sequel, for the article has that “Hari Seldon” psycho-historical mathematical “feel” to it. And, in one of those strange “synchronicities”, the article arrived from G.B. just as I decided to re-read Asimov’s famous Foundation series novels! Perhaps my doing so functioned as an “attractor”… we’ll get back to that idea in a moment.

So what has me so exercised? Well, essentially, the article is about one of my favorite topics, the mind-over-matter relationship. But this one’s a doozie in the sort of “ghost-in-the-machine” way, if you’re really paying attention:

A Beginners Guide to Randonauting

“Randonauting” is the term given to a particular activity in the exploration of randomness:

Randonauts are a community of people who are exploring the use of random number generators to find Blind-Spots and experiment with Mind-Matter interactions.

Needless to say, when I read that, I was hooked, and read on to a paragraph that G.B. had highlighted in the email sharing the article, and reading it in context, I can see why:

A Randonaut is a person who explores both the application and impact of randomness in the experience of everyday reality. This exploration into randomness can be carried out in several different ways. The two primary experiments that Randonauts are currently exploring are Blind-Spots and Mind-Matter interactions.

…

Mind-Matter Interactions

Mind-Matter interactions encompass the other side of Randonauting. This is the idea that the human mind actually has a statistically significant impact on the output of quantum random number generators (qRNG). The Fatum Bot can generate what are called Intention Driven Anomalies (IDA’s) which are coordinate locations that are calculated based on the density of qRNG output and which are often explored through the use of intention. What this potentially means is that your mind can have some influence on the location and subsequent experience that’s generated by the bot. There are two kinds of IDA’s that can be generated: Attractors and Voids. The difference between the two is the way in which they’re mathematically determined. They are essentially opposites of each other, but are both hypothesized to be influenced by the mind.

Now, regular readers here, or members of my website or readers of my books, in particular, Microcosm and Medium, are familiar with my fascination for the work of University of California materials science professor, Dr. William Tiller. Tiller conducted a rather breathtaking series of experiments to show whether or not the “Observer effect” of quantum mechanics can be extended into the macrocosmic world to affect large scale physical systems in a quantizable, measurable fashion through the sheer intention to do so alone. I won’t go into all the details here, save to mention that the two physical systems he tested were (1) the ph levels of water and (2) the gestation period of fruit flies. In both cases, a group of people were given a formally specified (i.e., written out) set of intentions that each system would be altered in a specific way, e.g., that the ph level of water would be raised, or lowered, a specific amount, or that the gestation period of fruit flies would be shortened a certain degree. The group was then instructed to meditate or focus its attention on the intention for a few minutes. The intentions themselves were somewhere between the imperative and subjunctive moods, that is to say, somewhere between a command (magic) and a request (prayer). The results were astonishing, and the physical systems were altered in the manner sought.

The experiments raise all sorts of questions: (1) is the effect magnified by the number of people involved? (2) Is the effect magnified by how long a period of time said intentions are “concentrated upon”? (I suspect, yes, for long and involved liturgical-textual reasons.) (3) Is the effect magnified or damped depending on the virtue (or lack thereof) of the individuals comprising the group? (Again, I suspect yes: “the prayer of a righteous man availeth much” and that sort of thing.)

But what caught my attention about that last paragraph cited about were the “mathematical”, i.e., specifically topological, references. “Attractors” or as they are sometimes called “basins of attraction” as well as their opposites, “voids” or “‘mounds’ of repulsion” are well-known constructs in topology. If you want a way to “imagine” these types of things, think of them as specific geometries in any number of spatial dimensions. For example, a basin of attraction could be represented by a bowling ball or other heavy object placed on a trampoline. The bowling ball or object is three-dimensional, sitting on a (more or less) two dimensional surface. The indentation in the surface caused by the object is the “basin”, which is easily demonstrable as an “attractor” if one rolls a golf ball toward the indentation. Roll it just  right, and the golf ball will be “attracted” into the basin. More than just gravity is at work here; it’s also the geometry of that indentation that’s at work, which is why Einstein’s General Relativity modeled gravity as a geometry.

Now, here’s the trick: imagine that “basin” idea as being able to be expressed in more than just two dimensions. That’s exactly what topology does with such geometries: it seeks to get to the essential mathematical  description of the geometry itself, which will carry over into as many dimensions as one wished. In fact, this is exactly what Einstein does with General Relativity, for he imagines his “bowling ball” to be sitting on top of a virtually infinite number of such two dimenional surfaces, all at discreet angles from one another, as if we’re looking at a trampolene underneath the bowling ball, another “upside down” but still indented, and yet another to the side and it’s indented, and so on.

This brings us back to the article, and to that last paragraph cited above, for it’s implying a whopper-doozie: it’s implying that those topological (n-dimensional geometric) constructs can be altered or modified (and perhaps even brought into and out of existence) by intention alone. Intention becomes the bowling ball in our bowling ball analogy. And that, folks, to put it country simple, is cosmic in its implications. (And for those really paying attention, it may mean there’s a consciousness-intention component to kontrabary and the technologies thereof.) The only problem, of course, is to develop an adequate mathematics of all this, and with that, we’re back to Isaac Asimov, the Foundation novels, and his character Hari Seldon, inventor of said mathematics. And since we’re talking about specific topological constructs, my suspicion has always been that any such mathematical language will have to incorporate healthy dollops of topology and related mathematical languages. (It is no accident that the psychologist Kurt Lewin wrote a book titled Principles of Topological Psychology!)

So what do I think may be going on here? To put it country simple once again, perhaps the people playing around with this – the “randonauts” – may be innocent in their explorations, but I suspect that we’re looking at an experiment in some very, very dangerous things being run by someone else, perhaps in order to obtain the laws of that cosmic power of intentionality.

You know… the Tower of Babel sort of thing…

That’s as succinct a warning as I can give to those who might be tempted to be a randonaut…

See you on the flip side…