Andres Ramos

Thank you Vladimir! I installed it and it's working. Not yet with faces of the style you have posted but basically it's running!

Very cool! Thank you!!!

Welcome Marie. It seems you found the right place finally.

Recently I saw a documentary about the british actress Judy Dench. What I did not know was that besides of being the boss of James Bond as "M" in many JB movies, Judy is doing a lot of private research about the nature, life and social behaviour of trees. She is collaborating with lots of scientists helping her to understand how trees are are growing, the social relationships they are building up with other trees, plants and fungus and how they communicate. In that documentary I saw how a biologists was using a contact microphone he pressed against the trunk of a tree and miraculously getting sound from it. Since it was summer you could hear water flowing through the inner rind, or to put it simple, you could hear the tree drinking. This fueled my imagination and I started to look for contact microphones. Very soon I found out that a simple guitar pickup is a contact mircophone and immediatly I ordered one at amazon. By use of some adapters I could easily hook it up to my digital voice recorder. Well equipped I drove outside to a huge forest 15 minutes by car away from my home. There were some trees with their rind partially removed. I assumed this was due to the destructive work of bark beetles. I did not have much expectations on catching sounds from a tree since in winter the trees are resting but I just wanted to give it a try. After some improper attempts to fix the pickup on the trunk I squeezed it into a fold in the bark and started my voice recorder. The first thing I observed was that I could hear some environmental sounds like chirping birds the microphone picked up but it was not that much. The next thing was I could hear sizzling sound which I supposed could have come from insects in the tree's trunk consuming his material. Crackling Sound.mp3 As I analyzed the recorded data at home in Audacity I discovered a lot more. The first tree I recorded gave me a very low rumbling sound. I thought this could be caused by my first unsuitable attempts to press the pickup against the trunk with my own hand. Basically the movement of my hand muscles and the streaming of my blood could have caused this effect. Anyway in this sound I found not intelligible speech but a speech like pattern. Very low speech pattern.mp3 After anaylzing the whole data I also discovered some fairly good spirit voices just be applying a little denoising. "Jetzt hält sie Wort.." -> "Now she keeps her word": Jetzt hält sie Wort.mp3 "Wir nehmen hier unsere Sachen" -> "We take our things here": Wir nehmen hier unsere Sachen.mp3 Another voice was hiding in a small "burst" of impulses that I related to the aforementioned work of insects. Due to my experiences with spirit impulses I knew that some hidden voices can be uncovered by applying the "Paulstretch" algorithm to the signal and so I did. "Will Rache!" -> "I want revenge!": Will Rache.mp3 To put this clear, I don't think the trees were speaking to me. Instead it's another proof that spirits may manifest their voices in every kind of sound material we offer them, no matter if this is noise, impulses, tones, vibrating air, electronic signals or whatever. Their potential of manifestation is hovering above every physical principle we have here on earth. Moreover I could see that my setup was working and I am curious for the spring time next year to go out again when the trees will wake up and start making sounds again.

I was looking for the program "Tile" but did not find it. Is this a free program?

Interesting! It seems you never were scared by those incidents?

Did it feel like a contact with a material or object or more like a force field?

It definitely is. You mentioned something very interesting, that lower tones are more receptive. As I analyzed the tones that Keith and I observed I found out they were composed as a symphony of low frequency tones starting below 50 Hz. They exactly had the length of 1s and came in groups. Check out the audio files but use a headphone. Normal speakers cannot deal with such low frequencies. LF impulse 2b.mp3 LF impulse 3.mp3 LF impulses.mp3

Is this always the same person?

Hm, this could be an improvement for our experiments. For my interferometer I am providing a modulation input to "send" tones to the spirits. Keith and I did some very interesting experiments with tones on the inteferometer this year. We could try any kind of frequencies or tones, that would be no problem, the question is what tones.

I did another test today with Michael Lee's ML application that is optimized for impulses. I got some very good results from it combined with the coherer mill. "Ascension": Ascention.mp3 "Season Cypress": Season Cypress.mp3 Forward:"Ascent Ma", Reversed:"Macht Messer"(Maybe "Makes measurement"):Ascent Ma - Macht Messer.mp3 "It's a sign": Its a sign.mp3 "Access yes": Access yes.mp3 "Es ist Scheisse"(It is shit): Es ist Scheisse.mp3 "Setzt immer diese Sequenz"(Always put this sequence): Setzt immer diese Sequenz.mp3 "Ist alles klar"(Everything is alright): Ist alles klar.mp3 "Ja, das ist halt alles hart"(Yes, everything is tough!):Ja das ist halt alles hart.mp3 "Smaragd ist"(It's emerald): Smaragd ist.mp3 "Andrés, es ist erlöst"(Andrés, it is redeemed): Andres es ist erlöt.mp3 "Blechmünze"(Tin coin): Blechmünze.mp3 "Ist Test"(It's a test):Ist Test.mp3 "In service":In Service.mp3 "Mrs. Merkels stress": Mrs Merkels Stress.mp3 "Du siehst Hass. Es löst. Wird Zeit"(You see hate. It's dissolving. Time has come):Du siehst ist Hass.mp3 "Es ist Wahnsinn"(It's madness): Es ist Wahnsinn.mp3 "Er erreicht das Ziel"(He reaches the goal): Er erreicht das Ziel.mp3 "Schwester" (Sister): Schwester.mp3 "A sadist": A sadist.mp3 "Uns verhasst" (We hate it): Uns verhasst.mp3 I got lots of more message with a content around an "Everything is very hard" context. Remarkably the spirits adressed that Mrs. Merkel is suffering from stress, what obviously is true.

I sometimes find incidents that ITC connections could rely on certain sounds or tones opening the gates for Transcommunication. At FB i found a post of a user telling this ( I translated thr content from german into english) "Published on 12/15/2020 Otherworld Contact (EVP) with a new trigger file that I created. For four years I have been looking for an audio file of sounds to enable the spiritual world to talk to us. It was important for us that the souls understand us and we them. Many pioneers of transcommunication have prepared the way for us. Without their research we would never have come this far. We are proud to continue their life's work." Since he values his results as a breakthrough, we can achieve already easily with our techniques, I wouldn't say it's breakthrough. However the mentioning of a sequence of tones to enable or improve transcontacts is startling. Could it be that there is kinda of a dialing code, resonances like a spell opening the gates?

A very interesting and clever setup you made, by the way. You combined reflection and refraction.

Yeah, I can see her!

Cool. What noise source did you use?

Very impressing Vladimir! Did you use "natural" water in a lake or creek or water in a bowl? Did you apply special forms of light?

I had this idea long ago. Using a rubber tube coherer that makes some noise. Amplifying the noise and driving a loudspeaker with it. The coherer is mounted on the loudspeaker. Thus we get a closed loop. Today I realized this setup with a pair of active PC loudspeakers. The coherer is mounted on a cork that is glued to the cone of the loudspeaker. VID_20201212_130008.mp4 I could regulate the coherer bias with a potentiometer. Of course the circuit very easily gets kicked into self oscillation. The trick is to keep the bias so low that it is just before self oscillation. The signal contains burts and areas where the signal is more calm and continous. I recorded the signals with a microphone in Audacity and applied Paulstretch and denoising. Andrés sie ham dich verwirrt (Andrés, they fuzzied you): Andres sie ham dich verwirrt.mp3 Anführung (Remark): Anführung.mp3 The following samples are doubled. At the beginning aou will hear the raw signal and afterwards the same signal processed. Ich hör (I can hear): Double_Ich hör.mp3 Alles ohne Sacher (All without Sacher):Double_Alles ohne Sacher.mp3 Sie sind noch da (They are still here): Double_Sind noch da.mp3 Sind sie doch auch noch lange (They are still for a long time): Double_Sind sie doch auch noch lange.mp3 In einem Serkra aufdreht (Turned up in a Serkra(?)):In einem Serkra aufdreht.mp3 Wir entscheiden (We decide): Wir entscheiden.mp3 The results are not groundbreaking but definetly better than the ones I gained with a static coherer. Double_Ich hör.mp3

What a great statement Fernando. It seems you have been dealing with those questions since long. They caused me some "clicks" in my head, especially what you said about certainty matches perfectly the process how a theory is adopted in mainstream science. Actually there is no detailed process thst specifies EXACTLY the acceptance criteria to match for a theory to be adopted. Of course a theory must be based on the currently accepted knowledge, it must have specifications for falsification, a.s.o, but the moment when the scientific world says, "Yes this is true. We add this to our knowledge standards" is blurry, it's creeping in somehow. This merely is the growing of certainty you mentioned above a threshold that no one really can specify. Another interesting analogy came to my mind after reading your post. If scientific knowledge is based on a experienced certainty then it has some analogy with quantum mechanics where the location and trajectory of an electron is also based on probability assumptions. Scientific knowledge in this sense is regarded as more objective if the probability of being objective is more positively valued as in other cases. Thus scientific knowledge maybe is a probability wave in itself. In my thoughts your "certainty" equals my "probability". This is even more fascinating since the certainty or probability is based on trust and not on hard objective acceptance criteria.

It takes time. As I had my initial visual itc experience with trees reflected in water i did session after session without success. The I left it for a while and lately as I was doing a walk in the park I just made some shots by intuition and "bang" I got the pictures for the document you helped me to create. Maybe our expectations are not helpful to open the right channels. Try not to planit but do it out of an instant feeling.

You pointed out something interesting. The scientific method was not deliberately developed but rather adopted by scientists. Thus their method is rather something that proved very well to manage physical things. To think that it is capable of explaining the wheels and gears of the universe is an a priori statement that literally comes out of nothing else but the trust in the immense success of the technical progress that took place in the past centuries. But both areas have no relation to each other basically. In the end it's belief, as always.

So true. I guess you experienced this yourself a lot since you are working in the academic world.

You know what the scientific method is until you try to define it: it’s a set of rules that scientists adopt to obtain a special kind of knowledge. The list is orderly, teachable and straightforward, at least in principle. But once you start spelling out the rules, you realize that they really don’t capture how scientists work, which is a lot messier. In fact, the rules exclude much of what you’d call science, and includes even more of what you don’t. You even begin to wonder why anyone thought it necessary to specify a “scientific method” at all. Article from physicsworld

This is so fascinating because we see pictures from the hereafter that are not just faces! Thank you so much Karyn!