[RT Wolf]

Just a question Mrs Cogan, how do you think that LoA works? While I've heard it said that super-LoA masters have the ability to materialize things (sorta like Jesus or Sai Baba), for most normal people, LoA is supposed to manifest intentions through meaningful coincidences or synchronisities.

It seems to be a fairly simple experiment (it would have to be done personally, or through the self-reporting of a group of people, unfortunately, like conscious experience of emotions, etc, this is something we have to get self-reporting for): Yourself, and/or other people get together and set some intentions that you believe in, and then keep track of what might be a synchronsity, especially keeping track of those that seem subjectively amazing. You might just be able to establish some sort of correlation (of course correlation does not equal causation). Would this sort of thing establish that LoA works (ie that Intentions cause synchronsities, or that intentions cause causation)? No, but it is a step forward, because you are testing the mechanism of the workings of the LoA.

As an example of correlation might be that I set the intention to excersize daily (barring illness or pain) for a month, on December 22. That same day (I just checked the timestamp on this and this is kinda freaky), I won a fitness DVD in the Subway Greatest Contest Ever Contest (out of 5000 dvds). Yesterday, I won three free months of gym membership (I think this might be only if I buy a year's contract but an interesting example none-the-less). For reference, I don't enter many contests, prolly entered about four-five in the last three months. There were a few other minor things related to my intention to become healthier.

These are both related to my intention to become healthier. This is not my RAS filter, because these are things that are outside my own head (I'm assuming).

It is, however, still possible that these things are just coincidences, and I can't think of any way to establish a stastical baseline. However, it would seem clear to me that when one variable goes up (an intention is set), the other also goes up (synchronisities related to that intention go up, ie, I won play tickets before I set the intention). One thing you could do is count the number of somewhat objective snychronisities (like winning contests) for every person in a group and chart it. And then repeat with different intentions. This is a toughie, there's a lot of confounding variables, so I think the next possible experiment design might work better:

I've previous written a post on what might be the design of another experiment about three groups thinking about someone they haven't seen in a long time, imaging the person, and a control group. It'd be important not to stress this point too much, so it might be disguised as a study on memory and social encounters. All would be asked after a period whether they met that person, talked to them, or heard them mentioned and how many times. The control group would just be asked after the period ended if they met someone from say two years ago within the time period. Fairly simple to find correlations then.

Phew, long post. Generally, though, I don't care about the details or minutae. I'm testing it for myself, and if it don't work, it don't work. If it does, then hurrah! And it seems to be doing something so far, so even if I'm wrong and IM isn't actually the real cause of my recent good luck, I don't think it can hurt me much.