View Full Version : An Entrainment in Time...

Glenn B. Wheaton
2010-Nov-11 Thu, 02:44

There is much to catch up with as we push forward towards the Holidays. We need to get the training reviews completed for the S-7 Annex A,B, and C. Once that is completed I would like us to come back to the topic of Entrainment.

While we have looked at environmental entrainments dealing with Roulette and a few other areas I would like to breach the topic of Entrainment and Time, or perhaps a more accurate way to say it would be Entrainment in Time. Remote viewers have a unique capability to observe the past and if you remember “The Man at 11 O’clock” and my attempts to send a message to the past then consider this…

Given a few bits of knowledge and a wee bit of design could an entrainment be launched to the past to set in motion something significant across a spectrum of time?

We have discussed this in the past and here is a post that I made sometime ago dealing with the environment of the viewer at play…

Aloha All,

Monday night's class was intended to demonstrate what is known about the nature of the pathway between the Remote Viewer and his/her target and understanding the potential for that pathway to support full duplex traffic. While there is so little known about how Remote Viewing works that could be considered scientifically factual, there is reason to believe that certain possibilities exist. One of these possibilities has to do with what I will call "Field Presence".

In class on Monday I approached the question of the gap between the viewer and his/her target. This zone would be identified as the medium between the viewer and the target including space and time. My question to you as the viewer is exactly what is it that you do when you Remote View? How is it that you can make contact with a target remote in space/time and retrieve information? Do you acquire the information from the target itself or from some other medium? Simplicity, economy, and reduction seem to indicate that attraction between the Remote Viewer and the target of interest forms the initial link and observation facilitates initiation of data flow between the two.

This implies that the Remote Viewer does in fact by a feat of consciousness make the leap to the target of interest and establishes, for a brief period of time, a pathway that could well be referred to as a Signal Line between the viewer and the target environment. Think about that for a moment and wonder a bit about the nature of this signal line and what it must look like and what its' qualities may include. It is logical that this pathway is something the opens between the two identified points and constantly modulates while it exists. So the Remote Viewer establishes and maintains or attempts to maintain this pathway to the target of interest and move information about that environment back along the pathway to the viewer.

This "Point to Point" communication event needs to be looked at from an overwatch aspect. Point A (the Viewer) opens pathway to Point B (the Target).

A. Consciousness activity at Point A opens the pathway to Point B.

B. This means that in the field environment at Point B there must be some degree of "Field Presence" by the consciousness activity at Point A.

C. Part of what is the consciousness activity at Point A has been displaced to Point B and is the Gatekeeper between the two points.

D. Maintaining the pathway to Point B is dependent on the consciousness activity at Point A. The quality of this pathway is dependent on the nature of the consciousness at Point A.

E. If pathway exists between Point A and B, then Point A must have a "Field Presence" at Point B, and Point B must have a "Field Presence at Point A.

F. What exists between Point A & B is a communication pathway with the "Potential for Full Duplex" communication activity.

This means that the potential for information to simultaneously travel to and from either point is a possibility. This would surely be limited by the ability of the viewer. Again I have said many times that your ability as a Remote Viewer is not limited by "Who" you are, but by "What" you are.

Once the Remote Viewer establishes contact with the remote target it may be possible to move information from the viewer's environment at Point A to the target environment at Point B. It is more likely that the gain or power of the Field Presence of the viewer at the target of interest would be higher by shifting the responsibility for attempting to move data from the viewer to the target environment from the Primary Awareness of the viewer to the Subconscious of the viewer.

The Subconscious provides a medium of transmission that is less susceptible to noise that would degrade the quality of the data being transmitted. When we think in fields and power we must consider the carrier to noise level. The pathway between the viewer and target must be considered as the carrier on which information is modulated. Think of it as a string between the two locations that gently wiggles as waves of environmental data move from one to the other.

To get the best possible gain, or peaks and troughs in this carrier wave we need a modulation effort that is clean and the Subconscious is the best candidate to transmit along the carrier wave to the target.

NLP provides for a method to introduce into the consciousness unique clarity in specific signals. By preparing a viewer a Monitor can utilize "Triggers" to flood the Subconscious of the viewer with a specific type of signal that can travel the carrier wave to the target during periods of good target contact by the viewer. Let me give an example using simple terms and concepts.

A remote viewer undergoes a basic NLP learning cycle to associate a physical trigger with the sensory smell of a very fragrant flower. Training is complete only when the viewer adequately responds to the trigger by experiencing the sensory smell of the fragrant flower. A target can be selected which will then be worked by the viewer. At any point during the process where the monitor feels that the viewer has good target contact the "Trigger" may be cued to flash the subconscious of the viewer with a specific signal (in this case the fragrant flower) in an attempt to move that signal back up the carrier wave and ingress into the target environment.

This type of NLP pushing of specific signals back up the carrier wave will be superior in gain to any conscious attempt by the viewer to move a signal back up the carrier wave to the target. It is clean, pure, and simply. A viewer could be prepped to maintain a library of hundreds of "Triggers" to be prepared to move any type of sensory signal compilation to a target area.

Now this opens a very interesting avenue for feedback, validation, and study, but for the poor man's James Bond it would be as simple to test as selecting an environment absent of flower fragrances and using a Remote Viewer to entrain that flower fragrance to migrate up the carrier wave to the target. Why a Remote Viewer? Because we know that a Remote Viewer can slip Time/Space. If the spectrum responds as I have laid out then at a future time one could physically visit the target blind and survey for environmental conditions. Perhaps in the examination of conditions at the target the flower fragrance would be recorded.

Two weeks ago I gave homework to the class to design an entrainment across Space/Time that could be quantified in some way. Credit must go to Debra Takagi for her design of “Flowers Across Time”.

So much to think about...what are you thinking?


I think this post lays out a basic path to move information to the past, but what about moving Entrainment instructions to the past? Well that is just a question of design really and I have drafted several models that I used in the “The Man at 11 O’clock” project that can be adapted a bit here and there. Most of all along the way I would like you to let some of the principal theory sink in a bit and swirl about. There is much we do not know and unless we begin to poke about it will stay hidden.


Dave Barnes
2010-Nov-11 Thu, 08:39
It’s difficult to know where to enter a discussion when you’ve joined a party that has been going on for years. If the ideas are familiar, you may want to contribute but spend an inordinate amount of time listening politely, taking care not to interrupt the flow of conversation with something that doesn’t fit.

At some point while listening, you may reach a point, a level of comfort, where you’re pretty sure that you can contribute without being disruptive.

…I’m there now.

Here are a couple of term papers written in the vanishing past (preserved in its original funky mechanical typing and college kid-ese) that are related to some of the things discussed here and show where I come from. IMHO, the continuous, “holographic” wave model and terms, which are particularly convenient for visually-oriented people, have been suppressed in recent years to favor discrete, quantum mechanics but I’m still in the “field” camp.

A wavish mind model (http://Pov.bridgesci.com/lib/HolographyMemoryMind.pdf)
State dependent learning (http://Pov.bridgesci.com/lib/HolographicMdlStateDepLearning.pdf)

My aging view is that modulations (cross-correlations) are the way that memories are stored and retrieved. Mnemonics, NLP anchors, NLP triggers, intent, and “the aperture” are the “same stuff”. I’m of the view that time, mass, “space”, and “objects” -including us- are also made of the same stuff. Being, position, navigation, and propagation involve the relative juxtaposition of wave patterns… manipulations we can do within ourselves.

From what I can tell, we see things the same way... albeit, some of you may see them more clearly.

Glenn’s post has so many seeds for thought. The last four words “it will stay hidden” are a call to action.

Glenn B. Wheaton
2010-Nov-12 Fri, 01:13
Aloha Dave,

Thanks for the trip back to Wave School :) I always hoped to get a TDY to Bose or Qualcomm to study waves and surfaces. They perhaps understand how waves penetrate matter the best. Another fellow Andrija Puharich was very intense in his study of plasma and waves; I have been a fan of his work for some time. His book Beyond Telepathy is one to have in the library. I do not yet have a grip on holograms and have been hesitant to embrace the whole holographic Universe thing. Seems to me though that we cannot be too far from holographic goggles at the movie theater.

I think my biggest battle within the remote viewing community will be to get them all to embrace propagation. They resist it so earnestly it is a bit surprising. Paul Smith, Targ and others reject it outright. They can’t seem to model consciousness in a Universe ruled by the wave but have no alternate theories. There is no real reason to believe anything else is at play beyond the standard physics of data moving. They say that remote viewing is beyond space and time and I say we slip time and space. It is not likely that anything in this Universe could really be beyond space time. Frequency itself is the real mystery. Surely this Universe has a standing wave but no one can even begin to wrap their brain around that one.


Dick Allgire
2010-Nov-14 Sun, 22:16
At the 2007 IRVA conference in Las Vegas Glenn Wheaton took part in a panel discussion on various aspects of remote viewing.

Toward the end of the conversation Glenn asked, "Do thoughts have mass?" The assembled experts and pontificators sputtered and blathered and pretty much ignored the question as if it was irrelevant.

I believe those were the most important words uttered at the entire conference.

Do thoughts have mass?

We went home and Glenn taught me quite a bit more about that concept. I designed, rehearsed and observed several entrainment experiments.

Two years later, at the 2009 conference there came a morning when I had a notarized document describing Paul Smith's tie, and the moment that I saw Paul Smith was wearing a purple tie with a guitar theme, I knew- experientially- that thoughts have mass.

At the end of my presentation, everyone in the auditorium asked "How did you do that?"

Here is a clue.

I had Paul Smith, on stage, crack the seal on the dated, notarized envelope. Two years earlier -on the same stage where I was standing- Glenn asked the same people, "Do you believe thoughts have mass?" And I remember them dismissing him.

They ought to have Glenn give a presentation. :-)