Remote Viewing and ARV
Remote Viewing (RV) is a mental ability and a practice in which an individual (known as 'Remote Viewer') describes an unseen target using extrasensory perception (ESP) or "sensing with the mind". The target is not accessible to usual senses due to distance, time or shielding. The 'Remote Viewer' is completely blind to what the target is, so he/she does not know anything about the target.
Using this skill, a Viewer can describe and access information about a target located anywhere in the world. There are no limitations in terms of time and space. The target can by anything, for example: object, location, event, person, animal, activity etc. If the target is an event, then it can be any past event, present event, and even future event.
The term was coined in the 1970s at Stanford Research Institute (SRI) by physicists Russell Targ and Harold Puthoff. At that time, remote viewing protocols where developed as part of a United States government-sponsored research program now known as "Stargate Project".
Like any other skill, Remote Viewing can be taught and can be learned by any person. There are Remote Viewing instructors and trainers available for classroom on-site training. Travel costs can get very high, so the best low cost option to learn Remote Viewing is through online video course. One of the best online courses is "MindMush Remote Viewing Introduction Course". For more information click on the image below
Associative Remote Viewing (ARV) is a methodology for predicting future outcomes of events that didn't yet started, using mental skill of Remote viewing.
Associative Remote Viewing protocol:
Here is a step-by-step description of the standard binary ARV protocol. Please note - this article deals only with events where only two outcomes are possible. When we have two outcomes in play the we can call it - a binary outcome event.
Let's choose a situation where there are only two possible outcomes. Let's begin by asking a standard question like, "Will it rain tomorrow? "Yes or no?" You can see that there are only two answers to that question in this situation: either it will rain or it won't. We scheduled this event for one day in the future, so by the end of the following day, we will definitely learn whether or not it rained. We will therefore learn the outcome tomorrow. You receive your Feedback at this point. Then you learn whether your prediction was accurate or not. Therefore, along with outcome, there is also your feedback.
Now we move on to apply ARV protocol on something where we can win some money. What first comes to mind is that you could predict the winner of a sport game. Then you could bet on the game and win some money if the prediction is going to be correct. Or, if you're into Financial Markets, you could pick one of the Forex currency pairs like EUR/USD or USD/CAD and predict the Up or Down direction (movement) of the pair for the next day or any time period. For instance, if the ARV prediction favors Up movement, then you would execute a trade in Up direction (a.k.a. Long trade). If the trade is set right, there could be only two possible outcomes for any currency pair movement: it is either Up or Down movement. This is only the basic principle how to set up a trade based on ARV prediction. The technical details are beyond the scope of this article.
How to apply standard binary ARV protocol?
1. Select a binary event and define what exactly you want to predict:
NBA basketball game: Chicago Bulls vs Orlando Magic. Who will be the winner? Or maybe: Will the Total Game Points be Over or Under the line of 211.5?
2. As a Remote Viewer for this ARV trial, find someone who will select two (2) different photo images (or real objects) so that you can stay completely blind to this selection. We call this person a Tasker. The job of the Tasker is to associate first photo target selected with one outcome (Chicago wins), and then to associate second photo target selected with other possible outcome (Orlando wins). In this setup, when the game is over and the winner and Outcome is known; then Tasker will show you only the actualized photo target. If Chicago wins, then you as Remote Viewer in this ARV trial will get and see only the photo target associated with the 'Chicago wins' outcome. This photo target is called your Feedback photo. You should never see the other photo -- the unactualized photo target.
3. So, Tasker is done with his/her part, and you are completely blind to the photo targets. The only thing you need to care about is your Feedback photo. The one you will see after the outcome is known. Now, cooldown a bit, and do your RV session in which you will: Describe and Sketch your Feedback photo target. This is called a Cue or Wording. A more detailed cue would be: Describe and sketch your Feedback photo target which you will see After the Outcome of the game.
4. Send your session's transcript to your Tasker who can also serve as a Judge/Analyst for your session. Job of the Judge is to compare descriptors and sketches in your session with both photo targets. If your session is a good match with one of the two photo targets, then the Judge will check what was the association with this matching photo. Based on that, Judge calls a prediction. It can be: Chicago wins or Orlando wins. In a case when no good matches or no matches at all with any of the targets, the ARV trial should be called a Pass. This means that you will not want to do any bets on this game.
5. You have your prediction and you can bet on it. After the game is finished, the Tasker's job is to send you or show you your Feedback photo. Tasker has to make sure that you see only the actualized photo target. This is fundamental in the ARV trial because when you do your RV session you are focusing on the moment in the future when you will see your Feedback photo. Only one Feedback photo exists for you. Describe and Sketch the One and Only One winning Feedback photo target.
Note: this procedure is with Independent Judge. You can apply Self Judging too. In that case, you still need Tasker or a computer to select two different photo targets for you, as you need to be blind to them before your RV session. The difference is in judging part, where you self-judge both photo targets vs your Transcript. So, you will see both photos before the Outcome, but if during RV session you have your intention and focus on your future Feedback target only, you'll still do a good job.
Note: this ARV protocol is explained in a way anyone can understand the basic points and the essence of it. Various technical aspects of the ARV phases are not covered in this text.
But guess what, if you are RV or ARV practitioner, then you can use ARV Studio software which is developed to simplify and automate all steps of the ARV protocol! Except remote viewing and judging, of course! ARV Studio is designed in a way that it leads you step-by-step through ARV trial and spares you of all unnecessary technical details, so you can focus on what matters most: the art of Remote Viewing :)
Associative Remote Viewing protocol example:
Let say we're predicting a soccer game: Norway vs Scotland.
We want to predict a Winner: the team progressing to the next round of a Tournament. As you know, there can be two possible Outcomes: Norway wins or Scotland wins.
In Associative Remote Viewing we do it like this: as we have two possible Outcomes, we need two photos: Photo1 and Photo2.
Photo1 will be associated with 'Norway wins' outcome.
Photo2 will be associated with 'Scotland wins' outcome.
The next step is for the Remote Viewer, who is blind to both photos, to sketch and describe the Photo associated with the Winning Outcome (Actualized Outcome). Remote Viewer is viewing into the future -- to his/her's future feedback photo. The result of a viewing session is a Transcript.
Next step is to judge/analyze the Transcript against both photos: Photo1 and Photo2. This is a job for an Independent Judge or you can do Self-judge. If transcript's descriptors and sketches are a good match with one of the two photos-- then the Judge is able to make a Prediction based on that. E.g.: if transcript is a good match with Photo1 then we can make a solid prediction that the 'Norway wins' outcome will be actualized. If no matches then Judge should call a Pass. Judging part always takes place before the start of the game/event.
Now we have Prediction before the game has started. When the game is finished and the Outcome is known, then the Tasker has to deliver the Feedback photo to the Remote Viewer. If 'Norway wins' outcome is actualized then Photo1 is the Feedback photo for Remote Viewer. The other photo should never be shown to Viewer.
So, when remote viewing you're focusing and connecting with your Future Feedback Photo -- which is Photo1 associated with 'Norway wins' outcome.
ARV Studio software is developed to simplify and automate all steps of the ARV protocol! Except remote viewing and judging, of course! ARV Studio is designed in a way that it leads you step-by-step through ARV trial and spares you of all unnecessary technical details, so you can focus on what matters most: the art of Remote Viewing :)
Comments or questions? Contact us.
Remote Viewing and related articles, publications and books (in alphabetical order):
Bem, Daryl J. (2011). Feeling the Future: Experimental Evidence for Anomalous Retroactive Influences on Cognition and Affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 407-425.
Bierman, Dick. Can Psi Sponsor Itself? Simulations and Results of an Automated ARV-Casino Experiment. Presented at the 56th Parapsychological Association convention in Viterbo, Italy. 2014
Fendley, T.W., 2016. WWC Group Sets the Pace in Associate Remote Viewing. Eight Martini’s Magazine. Issue No. 14. April, 2016.
Harary, K., & Targ, R. (1985). A New Approach to Forecasting Commodity Futures. Psi Research, 4, 79-85.
Honorton, C., & Ferrari, D. C. (1989). Future telling: A meta-analysis of forced-choice precognition experiments, 1935–1987. Journal of Parapsychology, 53, 281–308.
Honorton, C., Ferrari, D. C., & Bem, D. J. (1992). Extraversion and ESP performance: Meta-analysis and a new confirmation. In L. A. Henkel & G. R. Schmeidler (Eds.), Research in parapsychology 1990 (pp. 35–38). Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press.
Houck, J. (1986). Associative Remote Viewing. http://www.jackhouck.com/arv.shtml
Katz, D., Bulgatz, M., (2013) Remote Viewing the Outcome of the 2012 Presidential Election: An Expedition into the Unexplored Territory of Remote Viewing and Rating Human Subjects as Targets Within a Binary Protocol. Aperture Magazine, (Spring/Summer 2013), pp. 46-56.
Kolodziejzyk, Greg (2015). 13-Year Associative Remote Viewing Experiment Results. The Journal of Parapsychology. pp. 349 to 368.
Larson, E. (1984). Did Psychic Powers Give Firm a Killing In the Silver Market? --- And Did Greed Ruin It All? Californians Switch Over To an Extrasensory Switch. Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Oct 22, 1984. pg. 1
May, E. C., Spottiswoode, J. P., Faith, Laura V. (2000). A Correlation of the Gradient of Shannon Entropy and Anomalous Cognition: Toward an AC Sensory System. Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 53-72.
May, E., Utts, J., Humphrey, B., Luke, W., Frivold, T., Trask, V. (1990). Advances in Remote Viewing Analysis. Journal of Parapsychology, Vol. 54, September 1990.
May, E. Two Protocols for Data Collection and Analysis. Laboratories for Fundamental Research, Palo Alto, CA. 2006
Puthoff, H. E. (1985). ARV (associational remote viewing) applications. Research In Parapsychology 1984 (121-122). Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press.
Puthoff, H. E. (1996). CIA-initiated Remote Viewing program at Stanford Research Institute. Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 63-76., 1996
Puthoff, H. E., & Targ, R. (1976). Precognitive remote viewing. Research In Parapsychology 1975. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press.
Puthoff, H. E., & Targ, R. A Perceptual Channel for Information Transfer over Kilometer Distances: Historical Perspective and Recent Research. Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 64, No. 3, pp. 329-354, March 1976.
Radin, D. I. (1997). Unconscious perception of future emotions: An experiment in presentiment.Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp. 163–180.
Radin, D. I. (2006). Entangled minds: Extrasensory experiences in a quantum reality. New York, NY: Paraview Pocket Books (book)
Schwartz, Stephan A. (2007). Opening to the Infinite: The Art and Science of Nonlocal Awareness. Nemoseen Media: Langley, Washington. (book)
Schwartz, Stephan A. Through Time and Space: The evidence for Remote Viewing in Evidence for Psi. ed. Damien Broderick and Ben Goertzel McFarland Jefferson, N.C. 2015. pg. 44 and pp. 204-209.
Schwartz, Stephan A. Two Application-Oriented Experiments Employing a Submarine Involving a Novel Remote Viewing Protocol, One Testing the ELF Hypothesis. Invited paper. The Philosophical Research Society Conference on Extraordinary Human Functioning, August 1977. Invited Paper. Annual Meetings of the Southwestern Anthropology Association/ the Association for Transpersonal Anthropology, March 1978. Invited Paper. Proceedings American Society for Psychical Research, November 1979.
Smith, C., Laham, D., & Moddell, G. Stock Market Prediction Using Associative Remote Viewing by Inexperienced Viewers. Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 28., No. 1., pp. 7-16, 2014.
Smith, P. H. (2005). Reading the Enemy’s Mind: Inside Star Gate—America’s Psychic Espionage Program. NY: Tom Dougherty. (book)
Smith, Paul. (1998). Coordinate Remote Viewing Manual, Stanford Research Institute International.
Spottiswoode, S. J. P., & May, E. C. (2003). Skin conductance prestimulus response: Analyses, artifacts and a pilot study. Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 617–641.
Targ, R., Katra, J., Brown, D., & Wiegand, W. (1995). Viewing the Future: A Pilot Study with an Error-detecting Protocol. Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 367-380.
Targ, R. (2012). The Reality of ESP: A Physicist’s Proof of Psychic Abilities. Wheaton, IL. Quest Books. (book)