Does the Global Consciousness Project prove retrocausality and explain the antipodal duality?

[Avanti Shrikumar]

I was thinking about the methodology of the GCP and in particular the XOR mask that is applied to the raw bitstream generated by the random number generator in order to guarantee that the expected value of the resulting bitstream is exactly 0.5. The Global Consciousness Project proved the existence of correlations between the final RNG outputs, not with the raw RNG outputs, which means that the quantum tunneling processes that provided the raw bitstream were conditioned on the XOR mask that would be applied to it. In other words, a constraint was applied on the physical processes behind the quantum tunneling such that RNGs at different locations would produce similar output only after XORing with a bitmask, and if you replace "output" with "measurement", you get the same type of constraint that applies in quantum entanglement: a coupling between measurements. This in turn suggests that the "hidden variables" of quantum mechanics don't specify individual measurements; they specify constraints on the outcomes, consistent with the retrocausal interpretation of quantum entanglement.

In other words, "fate" exists and it is authored by our free will/consciousness, which retro-causally influences events so that particular coincidences occur. By extension, could we argue that even our laws of physics are a retrocausal explanation for the universe designed by the "free will" of the collective consciousness? I wouldn't be surprised if that is the reason for the recently discovered antipodal duality (https://www.wired.com/story/particle-physicists-puzzle-over-a-new-duality/): the laws of physics must be set up to allow coincidences to occur, and this manifests as a duality between seemingly unrelated aspects of physics.

What do you think? As an aside, I prepared a writeup on the stats used in the GCP that I think is clearer than the writeup on the website - in particular it clarifies the two very different contexts in which the "Stouffer's Z" is used. I would be happy to help update the writeup on the website if desired.

Sincerely,

Avanti Shrikumar

[Carole Aubin]

Collective Consiousness .  I see this when there are Big News events , I see this in the Lottery.  A random number generator.

[Roger Nelson]

Hi Avanti, and Carole,

I am uncertain how this note from Avanti comes by way of GCPwork, but I will respond inline. Sorry for being so slow getting back to you Avanti.

Roger

On 4/7/2024 5:12 PM, Carole Aubin wrote:

Collective Consiousness .  I see this when there are Big News events , I see this in the Lottery.  A random number generator.

On Monday 21 August 2023 at 09:38:43 UTC-4 avanti.s...@gmail.com wrote:

I was thinking about the methodology of the GCP and in particular the XOR mask that is applied to the raw bitstream generated by the random number generator in order to guarantee that the expected value of the resulting bitstream is exactly 0.5. The Global Consciousness Project proved the existence of correlations between the final RNG outputs, not with the raw RNG outputs, which means that the quantum tunneling processes that provided the raw bitstream were conditioned on the XOR mask that would be applied to it. In other words, a constraint was applied on the physical processes behind the quantum tunneling such that RNGs at different locations would produce similar output only after XORing with a bitmask, and if you replace "output" with "measurement", you get the same

It may be a language issue, but it is not correct to say the RNGs produce similar output only after XORing. I would say that the RNGs produce correlated output after XORing (or even after XORing). In other words, the data from separated RNGs become correlated even with the constraints of the XOR. We have no interest in the final bitstream being correlated with the raw noise. Rather the XORing is designed to remove 1st order bias of the mean of the data. The actual experimental protocol is aimed at changing the final, post-XOR data sequences in a similar way across devices such that correlations between devices might be observed. And this is exactly what we observe.

type of constraint that applies in quantum entanglement: a coupling between measurements. This in turn suggests that the "hidden variables" of quantum mechanics don't specify individual measurements; they specify constraints on the outcomes, consistent with the retrocausal interpretation of quantum entanglement.

In other words, "fate" exists and it is authored by our free will/consciousness, which retro-causally influences events so that particular coincidences occur. By extension, could we argue that even our laws of physics are a retrocausal explanation for the universe designed by the "free will" of the collective consciousness? I wouldn't be surprised if that is the reason for the recently discovered antipodal duality (https://www.wired.com/story/particle-physicists-puzzle-over-a-new-duality/): the laws of physics must be set up to allow coincidences to occur, and this manifests as a duality between seemingly unrelated aspects of physics.

It's a pretty good story, but there is an underlying assumption that there must be a change in the electron flow or the tunneling parameters, or something in the diodes (or FETs). I think the anomalous effects may need to be recognized as occurring at a higher or more comprehensive level. The candidate that comes most easily to mind is the statistical ensemble level. I know most people say, but, but, there has to be a physical process, a change in the electron count, etc. But I think that is ultimately misleading -- much to strong a constraint imposed by our experiential learning and our physics conditioning.

What do you think? As an aside, I prepared a writeup on the stats used in the GCP that I think is clearer than the writeup on the website - in particular it clarifies the two very different contexts in which the "Stouffer's Z" is used. I would be happy to help update the writeup on the website if desired.

I probably would be happy to put your writeup on the stats on my global-mind.org website. I'd like to see it, of course, and discuss it unless it is transparently clear to me that it is better than what I have there (that should be easy). I tried the link above "prepared a writeup" but that goes to your much more general article, https://avshrikumar.medium.com/the-global-princeton-experiment-that-found-trillion-to-1-odds-that-a-collective-consciousness-e94c911f79f8

Sincerely,

Avanti Shrikumar

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "gcpwork" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gcpwork+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gcpwork/644affb5-38f9-4458-94f3-4e307adc53d5n%40googlegroups.com.

-- 
Mitakuye Oyasin: "All my relations" -- We are all connected.

Roger Nelson
Global Consciousness Project
rdne...@princeton.edu  http://global-mind.org

[Carole Aubin]

Wow the techy stuff is over my head.  I enjoyed reading your observations and theories.  I noticed that when I was doing amateur hobby Remote Viewing that  when I would go to the Lottery site I could see that the numbers for that day example 401shwoing a highway number .... would show up on pick 3 along with the meaningful coincidence of a missing person was announced on television or the internet big public news or recently an amber alert , I noticed that the pick 3 lottery numbers from a random number generator gave a street numbers.  Meangful coincidence?  I  done this more than once ..get my own area co- ordinates.

Carole Aubin

On Monday 21 August 2023 at 09:38:43 UTC-4 avanti.s...@gmail.com wrote: