Jump to content

Experiment 002 - Cognitive Future Building


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The problem and a constructive solution with this Idea is that it is primary based on a complete intangible, The technique of "Lucid" dreaming is the best solution to this cognitive puzzle. Employing techinques, while one is dreaming will aid in constructing a enviorment to facilitate cognitive time travel, once understanding and mapping of this plane is accomplished. techniques must be employed using our own understanding of physics must be use to determine the "physical nature of this plan of existence to determine whether time is linear or non-linear. Once modal determination has been estalblished, chain conveyance are manifested and used to create a compiled link beteween the member's of your selective un-conscious global group to relay messages of the future to their local group. There is no real causality violation because the entire process takes place in un-conscious time, and the action of website posting is delegated to the sub-local, preserving he time line in the integrity of the global. Knowlegde of the causal pre-tense would be mutually shared amoung the global group through the initial primary during conveyance and compilation actions. This would be especially true for non-linear time modes. :P [/color]



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Ok Palady the time is fast approaching for your Auroras! 5 more days.


I think I will take my digital camera out and have the setting on "fireworks"


I hope that will work anyway. I have no idea as it seems to be the only setting to see


lights in the dark clearly. You never answered my question....are you going to video tape it?


If you know another setting that would be better for my camera let me know as this camera is rather new and I am not that familiar with all the settings.


I plan on posting my photos here if I see anything.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 days? It's suppose to be rainy all week or mucky weather. As to a camera setting, is it a camera or a camcorder? I have a camcorder that also can take still pictures, but as I see it, a camera probably would be better but only still pictures. Also you may want to view about low-light settings as having a "Nightshot" setting or if you really do not want color (and then what is the purpose but that is all the better that they are really with cameras and not camcorders being better) and also a Super Nightshot setting. I was reading the other day about that stuff and now there are film cameras that have digital settings for manual exposures. Camcorders like mine do not really have manual exposures but have some Aperture Settings - like Sunset, Fireworks, and such others (going off of my camera).


However, I think the "Fireworks" setting is for bright fireworks like on July 4th, and may be the wrong setting as Auroras are Pastel and Dim or Reddish with other colors but mainly a sky event that is more pastel in nature.(unless one is further North then they may be brighter, but still dim according to the camera or camcorder, but better seen with the naked eye.)


That usually makes it a "Time Exposure" so like anything else they continually muck up unless you spend (no joke here) $5000 for a camera, what you get is an adequate camera or camcorder mainly for daylight pictures or a neon-light at night kind of settings. Dim, dim pictures are difficult to take without taking a time exposure. I think the slowest shutter setting I seen was like 1/4 sec, with cameras maybe having up to a few seconds or up to even say 60 seconds, but not so for camcorders or video recording still picture cameras. Although I have taken tape in the nigh, it is grainy and needed the Super Nightshot setting which is "green" and grainy like a CCD image taken by someone in astronomy. Although seeing excellent pictures in astronomy by an amateur at the Texas Star Party, and self-developed by a film (probably not digital at the time back in when - 1991) camera like the old-ones they use to make, the new digital cameras are mainly cut-down versions of everything that was before. In other words, one use to be able to leave the exposure open to take a like 13 second shot of Saturn if one wanted to because the film gathered more light when the exposure was manual. (that all had to be worked out a little or different lengths of exposures tried until a time length was found that yielded a good picture.)


I am looking for a exposure setting just in case despite the gloominess of the posting above.


Oh, one thing not to use is the Color Show Shutter, although it is not a fast moving object so maybe that is something to consider, as if for a night picture and moving object, it would be blurred. But the aurora will be blurred to the extent of just only adding more to it, so it builds up the image. The Nightshot setting on my camcorder sends out an infrared beam so it is about good for - 30 feet - see what I mean. The Super Nightshot setting makes a little like a CCD and the image is 16 times brighter so that will work but produce probably a green aurora. I am still looking, but there probably is no good-setting to use. (that is why now I am looking back to a digital camera that takes a film up to ASA3200 film because of all of this, I guess I did not understand at first.)


If a camcorder like mine, I suppose I would just use the Super Nightshot setting and run the film in the camcorder and maybe see a green aurora, because with editing, perhaps it would change to red color changing the image by editing.


Throw all the junk they make nowadays and sell it, I guess - in my case with my camcorder.


I just read for mine that if there is a mercury-sodium vapor light, I am suppose to use the Indoor setting and not the Outdoor setting.


Sunset setting with Super Nightshot may be a setting.


Take a pick and do not use to high a setting with any digital zoom as it also does not work that great either.


I see where I do have a adjusting the exposure manually (but again that is usually about the same) but it states "When recording dark pictures (night scenes) faithfully. (that usually means probably city lights and quite a few of them or so perhaps - didn't know I had that.)


Well, I guess you have to go through your manual that came with the camera or camcorder to see what the exposure might me, and read it with a grain a salt as a picture that is not meant to take sky pictures of stars or an aurora and try and find a manual setting that may make it better for a night shot.


On mine, I guess I would just use Super Nightshot setting and put up with the slightly green color of the image if it even showed an Aurora without using a camera that has a manual exposure setting like a real old camera that one attaches a shutter release cable to (as to not shake the camera) and press once to open the shutter and a few seconds later release it to close the shutter.





Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I know is that with my camcorder, proabably 1/4 second is about it for exposure time max and that I would have to use the Super Nightshot setting, but I also know that trying to get a subject around 50 feet away did show something but that on the film it was grainy very grainy and not all that good or even fair but poor image quality. (think closer for camcorder film or pictures).


I would also use the remote control and set the camcorder on a tripod aimed North or more North than any other direction, but then I have a mercury-sodium vapor street-lamp in that direction and getting away from that would make me aim the camera higher and that would probably miss the Aurora all together. (if the Aurora even can be seen - as usually one can imagine it better than actually seeing it at this latitude (40 degrees around) here in the USA without being in Canada or the North Pole or Alaska actually).


Yep, that's about it for the camcorders, and even though some cameras are better nowadays, it still is about the $1500 question?


Fast film more grainy, as in ASA3200 or 1600, although not all that bad, but again not like ASA64 film with better grain but longer exposure times, and still black and white film for grain the best but with a black and white picture.


I would not expect HD camcorders to be any better either as the taking of the film is not really meant for night picture in darkness (total darkness or so) either.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. Unless you can keep the shutter open for probably a minute or longer, just is not going to happen. I have the moon in the picture during mid-afternoon taping an airshow where one can not zoom in and follow the blue angels. Maybe one shot I will see about later on (on the film from last year already.) The moon sure maybe about 1/250 of a second, but then my moon seems to be out of focus about like trying to follow the blue angels flying and trying to bend all ways and over where you just lose them in the viewfinder and the other eye did not seem to help much either (both eyes open - so one is looking regular field of view the other eye trying to see something in the viewfinder.


Not for an Aurora without probably at least a minute exposure or probably longer like 5 minutes whatever - 10 - 15 whatever it may turn out to be.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok 10 Aug 07, we got:




Solar wind


speed: 559.9 km/sec


density: 4.1 protons/cm3


Updated: Today at 2243 UT


X-ray Solar Flares


6-hr max: A0 2030 UT Aug10


24-hr: A0 2030 UT Aug10


Updated: Today at: 2245 UT


Daily Sun: 10 Aug 07


Sunspot 966 poses no threat for strong solar flares. Credit: SOHO/MDI




Data from:






quoted paladius:




"PAmela, maybe you want to propose an event which is more feminine? I figured a burst of light might be inspiring to many people and if it came from an undeveloped solar system, no harm done. Those things do happen anyways, very rarely, but maybe we could push the time table for one to August 10th, or 11th, or 12th, etc. I have that whole week off. ;-)"






"PERSEID FIREBALLS: The Perseid meteor shower is underway. Don't panic, the peak doesn't occur until August 12th and 13th, but already 10+ shooting stars per hour may be seen during the dark hours before dawn."










Space Medal Honor?



Link to comment
Share on other sites

I forgot to look. Did anyone see anything?


Sorry, I guess I blew this one huh?

Uh yeah. and it was YOUR experiment too.

I did go out for about 15 minutes. Didn't see anything because it was


a little too hazy from the rain. I just wasn't that into it. Guess you weren't either.


I kinda had my heart set on the fish thing. But atleast I went out and looked thats more than you did! Man, I aint never doing another experiment with you! You suck! :P


Anyway did any one see the meteor shower?



Link to comment
Share on other sites

a large coronal hole appeared on the suns horizon yesturday. It should reach earth on August 15th. Thats teh best I can do. Once again, sorry Pamela. Hopefully you'll see some Auroras tonight.


Ok. I will go back out late tonight with camera in hand and try to stay out a little bit longer. :)


Are you still on vacation? Hope you are somewhere interesting if you are!



Link to comment
Share on other sites

the 15th is a bad day. How about the morning of the 16th? Anyway, away from city lights probably will be the only place an aurora would show, if at all. Remember, some people in an astronomy club saw the aurora once, and it was out a ways from city lights that shine into the night. So, perhaps early morning may be better but then I am not sure about that.


And after the other thread, then I wonder what drag is if a mass is in a vacuum? Between friction and drag, please try and obtain real physics laws for the answers. We are not flying in an airplane in this atmosphere.


Oh, before I forget the aurora guy from the astronomy club works here:




Perhaps he will be seeking intelligent life from Outer Space if he is running the place.


This is what you get because of time exposure of film.




Activity 7





Link to comment
Share on other sites

Friend Paladius


I believe.


However as Aquinas says one should know, instead of believing. It adds a little bit more certainty to the subject. But I know what you all meant. However do yo know why is it that think tanks actually work? They had one back in Colorado, it ended up pretty messy if I recall well. Would not want to be back there, too much "Interference".


However good luck, you would probably be successful anyways. However, you might start experiencing a sense of presence, deja-vu and an augmentation of the common petit-mal that accurses most people, other than that you will all be fine, unless you were using psicotronic enhancements. That wouldn't be good. I do not exactly know what it causes but it aint good.


Until later becomes now



Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a rosey experiment. It is a shame nobody popped up on the 10th...Still if such an experiment had already taken place your in a prime spot to examin the results.


Although the question becomes; why do such an experiment in the first place?. Why attempt to steer humanity through deception and toward what ends? Even if you honestly and openly attempted steer humanity once you start working with large groups with leaders ,things normaly tend to take a facist turn.


If your aim is to understand reality then you don't really need your hypothises tested because you can live on assumption of the hypothises for the betterment of all...HOWEVER!!! If your aim is to control soceity then, one might defintly be interested in proving a hypothises such as you profess.


Either way we'll find out in 08 wont we.


Ron Paul for president.



Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Create New...