Alone one may make floaters/foxes in their spacial sphere, that is, the area around one, but these would not be the instantaneous floaters traceable as symbols of a transference, in the freshest sense of the word.

How to take a picture of a floater.

Making a floater for a photograph is not difficult. A camera that is able to handle slight closeups, and a camera trigger is all that is necessary. 1000 or 1200 film is best because these things only appear at the instant of opposition from libidinal difference, but disappear with any sort of agreement. Even agreeing to disagree will make foxes/floaters transparent. So one must be totally discreet and surprise a subject for a picture of one, or catch one when pulling energy out of an unsuspecting person with a camera. Catching a floater on film from every day life would take an unsuspecting room of people, with unsuspecting test subjects, and good high speed camera due to low light needed (a feat for which only U.S military technology could do, I might add), therefore, much money. So I use a computer with unaware people in a chat room. Why must the person be unaware? Because a person or group that, even unconsciously, feels one is "pulling" energy from them (the photograph-able floater is a symbol of this everyday occurance) or agrees unconciously that energy can come out of them, makes them alert, braced, and unconsciously aware of the flaoter, hence unseen. A floater, additionally, will not be seen because agreeing about seeing this symbol/real energy in the air, even unconsciously will not enable this flashing light to be seen. Therefore, as a kosher experimenter one fills the unaware and busy chat room (or friend) with as much loving energy as one can muster. Suddenly, one must get as nasty a disposition as possible and protract the loving energy from one or more in the chat room into themself. If the human energy is put in and "pulled" out within only a few seconds, the experament will be ethical. It is not good to flatter people with human energy sense the subjects will act on it in about 3 seconds as they feel a "flattery." Ethical security is maintained from those in a chat room not acting on the energy put into (transferred) the room (i.e. they would feel the human energy as a pronounced "flattery" and if they act on it, they "sin" or err.). If one makes another err, that person doing the flattery errs. One certainly should not be nasty without being benevolent first, and the more love one "adds" to the chat room [and pulled out quickly], the clearer floater one can get a snap shot of. A Jungian transference of nastiness pulls energy out of the chat room. I, additionally, add a jerk of the neck and blink while transferring this psychic energy (Metabolic muscle movements from blinking and jerking adds to the transfer) for extra effect, and it was at that instant, I got the pictures one sees by triggering the camera. Unfortunately, nasty or negative is more effective than trying to project the same amount of love to make the photo- nastiness is easier to make than goodness- (Hidiki Ohira, Ward M Winton, Makkiko Oymama, 1998). Finally, the light must be roughly equivalent to a 40 to 60 watt light bulb where the floater will be traveling. Only expensive high speed video will capture these with light brighter than this. The shutter speed should be on a slower speed than called for for 1000 speed film. This will blur a jerking head, but the floater is only available for an instant. It "disappears" (or goes back as transparent psychic energy to the host) most every time the partner perceive you are trying to get a picture of it. One may not get a floater the first time, but after a few surprises, a small luminance will be visible between the person(s) and you. So, be fast for ethic's sake, and do not let the "flattering" love energy going to the chat room exceed three seconds before you pull the energy out. Again- be a kosher experimenter. Best wishes as you catch FLOATERS, that are, perhaps, the FOXES of Solomon!Additional sense 1999 writting: Because of the vast increase of knowledge of these floaters, photo shots of floaters from adults is not as easy due to much know- ledge of them, again because even unconscious agreeement of visible human energy negates the FLOATER/FOX. To get people less likely to know when a person wants to photograph a floater/Fox it may be necessary that people on the lines not know intuitively when a floater is being "taken" out of them. So one merely makes a small circuit of a random event generator to trigger a camcorder switch (one will need to open a little switch on a remote camcorder switch unit to turn on the camcorder when the radom event generator hits the proper time. The proper time will be anywhere within the time one leaves the room of the experiement to a day later. That is....a camcorder must get turned on any time that the photographer does not know it and will make the whole experiment a "blind" experiment as in psychology. A random electic pluse to the trigger button of a camcorder will be taking a picture of two people from two different PHONE CHAT LINES (the same as a regular phone chat line where the action between the people is live and no one can see the other person will be perfect for this). No one, not even the photographer knows when the camera will snap a picture of the two seperate phone chat lines to snap a picture of a floater happening when a person on one chat line just meats a person on the other phone chat line. Simply put, when and if two people are just meetting each other (just innitially aware of each other's presence) a floater usually happens due to the people exchanging a little bit of energy as a common TRUST exchange. People on chat lines usually aways trust innitially a new people on a line, that is, unless they find out that people is a, for lack of a better word- "bad guy" ect. Such times happen when a person innitially meats another person, or exchanges money with a person as well. When the camcorder turns on and no one's vibes are in the room that could interfere with any results of a new meating of people, a chance of a floater will be excellent, EVEN though it seems everyone knows about floaters. These psychological "blind" methods require that one also have a small circuit that turns on two phones, dials them to the chat lines, and the same circuit turns them off after about ten minutes of filming the two phone recievers face to face (with the chat line people chatting) to catch a floater. It may seem hard to get a very small circuit (like a program for a computer) that turns on and off all of these electronic devices, but it works well. Obviously it will seem very hard not to let another know they are even setting up a camera, (and this requires patience) snapping the picture and doing so so discreetly that one's own presence doesn'e even distort the "vibes" in the room, but alas, the more a FOX knows you are after him...the more tricky he becomes- Best wishes FOX/FLOATER catching!

Back to Floaters Preview Page

These flashes/dots are not the Auras. Auras seem to be related to Floaters, but not as difficult to see by any means. As Kerlian photography indicates there is a small force emanating from life forms, but having observed Kerlian photography, it is obvious that floaters do not have identical characteristics. It has been said (New Age Metaphysics Bulletin Board AOL 1999) that occasionally part of an Aura may fly off and became a floater. But to my knowledge this is yet to be proven empirically.

Publishing floaters will surely invite scrutiny from concerned obstetricans. But the following experiments, I trust, confirm the physical nature of the Floater-Foxes. Therefore, I invite the reader to continue while I talk about measuring a medium; "we-feelings" and the future of such "we-feelings"- a theoretical utopia- for this light phenomena. I will call the "we-feelings" an opposition-less environment; more commonly known as "teem-spirit," or a "peaceful" environment.

*In Margins of Reality one sees common idioms made quantitative by no less then the use of a geography for thought. As part of quantum physics, therefore, this thought energy is subject to the Complimentary Principal.

Floaters display themselves many times according to one's world vision. The best of these visions, hopefully, will happen. But the vision where leaders as well as the governed have equal possibilities for work, potential,; or a possible utopia, I would like to show as a possibility. Peace/teemwork can be our human energy constant. Measurements of something as complicated as the future of an "ether" of "we-feelings," all the time in people and things can be achieved by explaining how to make the "we-feeling"/peace. Afterward we take this simple procedure, sandwich the ether between one's idea of social perfection and today's society with its problems, the other scenario. Utopia need exist only as a medium; a possibile "constant feature" for floaters and only changes from one future philosophy to that of another'sthat rub's the grain. Elaboration a great deal on the utopia is not necessary, but only a topological (a large area of society) look at what a "peaceful environment's" characteristics can do to sustain, if possible, it's own endurance.

The "four acres of farmable land for everyone living," has been said to be an Elysium for everyone on earth- Utopia. Government machinery and mechanical weapons hope, obviously in vain, to solve problems of homelessness, and crime etc., but no one's bubble on this is vital enough to pop. However there is a chance of entropy (entropy in this case means taking away the power from politicians that are not, and to be perfectly honest, too rich to understand the common working person. And also will mean balancing of forces and power of law enforcement so that such a thing were possible) coming to the rescue. Mechanical altruism, scientific "goodness", would not far removed if one considers the recently discovered ability to learn higher standards, by computers. Computers can make their own copy of nature in all of her basic features, without being programmed for it. This is Artificial Life, A-Life. But first let see a little bit of what Artificial Life is.

Through Nuemann⁵, and Consway,⁶ Stuart Dean, Artificial Life sciences say that there is an optimum level of information exchange convivial to what we call life...." "In-between the chaos and fixed proportions of the Universes's entropy (entropy meaning chaos) life can be measured." "Life, in the dictionary sense of the words, is a complex system, It is a dynamic equilibrium, (James Lovelock, Lynn Margulis 72) that carries on exchanging and evolving over an infinite amount of time." How does Artificial Life from a computer machine make such a difficult substance? From sources such as the popular movie; Batman II, and others, vast characteristics of penguins exercised a kind of mitosis for them selves. The data itself "spawn" characteristics from an unwritten program and was accurate for penguin behavior. The attribute, although unusual, enhanced the film. This is not to say that "spawning" or A-life is irreducible, but according to the experts, computers in A-Life have learned to reproduce, hunt for "food," and survive in a world system from generating their own programs. (Kevin Coble, Larry Yeager). So from inorganic situations such as computer data the correct man-controling logic alone, reverses chaos and makes life. Artificial Life, in turn, can make future copies Artificail life (Frank Tipler)in principal. The chaos assuming having the few rules needed to start small and large A-Life activity, by complex cellular activity and reversing chaos entropy, can create another thing just as extremely complex. As anything distroyed by chaos of loose "laws" floating around in the Universe, the combination of Laws (even Laws stating time did not exist according to the Alpha and Omega Point- Frank Tipler) shows makes "beings" where eventually these "beings" may dominate everything else in nature. They just as easily creat a need to be checked, and create in themselves another "life" in hand with Gaia Theory Principals.* Combining chaos reversing A-Life it may also be necessary to stop Life making. At the point the earth gets to crowded with organic life, A-Life principals concievably balance out organic "ambition" to change everything into life. This also means making those who are reckless and non-lawful will deal with "beings" that are designed for "law-enforcement." All of which can be done with a machine that, if big enough, is similar to a Jewdeo-Christain definition of an Almighty God (Frank Tipler, The Physics of the Resurrection).

This does not mean such a future will happen but according to Gaia, entropy, with psychic war such could be possible. Either this or mankind will die out from wars, illnesses, etc. So deterministic logic and progressively higher ideals for both mankind and the earth can eventually provide, in Principal, which means in a scientific way, an ultimate utopia agreeable to everyone's standard of of "higher" living. Now defining just what is "higher," in terms of logic, is the question, and one must doing so with pragmatic tactility. For this one must illustrate higher from lower knowledge as forms of communication. The result then needs to be seen with respect to what nature views as good (nurturing).

* Gaia Theory is the premise by Lovelock that the "earth is a living organism doing the regulating for the benefit of life as a whole. This view would seem to imply that Gaia has intent and purpose. Some scientists still consider the "whole system to be blind, unconscious and operated by the random interaction of matter- the assume it earth has no regulating factors." "A colleague of Lovelock's; Andrew Watson developed a mathematical refutation of "'blind random interactions'" called Daisyworld. Although this model was excellent in favor of Lovelock's Gaia and even more precise and detailed example of the self-regulation of the earth as as whole exists in the way carbon dioxide concentrations in our atmosphere are regulated, and at the way clouds are formed.

The only natural source of atmospheric carbon dioxide, the notorious greenhouse gas, in any significant quantity, is volcanic activity (both on land and under the sea). The only natural way in which it is taken out of the atmosphere in any significant quantity is through the weathering of certain kinds of rock. Water reacts with the rocks in the presence of carbon dioxide. In the reaction, carbon dioxide is taken out of the atmosphere and locked up with calcium to from calcium carbonate, which is eventually washed into the sea. Life isn't needed for the reaction to happen, but bacteria and plant roots in soils greatly increase the rate of the process by actively pumping carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and into the soil, where much more of the gas comes into contact with rock and water than would be the case without the intervention of living organisms. Once in the sea, the resulting carbonates are used by various minute marring algae (in particular the Coccolithophores) to make exquisite chalky shells. these rain down to the bottom of the sea when their tiny occupants die, thereby safely locking away the carbon dioxide as massive deposits of chalk and limestone. the presence of these tiny living creatures means that the chemicals which made up the atmospheric carbon dioxide are 'processed' by a living being and turn back into rock. Coccolithophores also play a part in the formation of clouds, trees, and works in the same manor as Daisyworld, which therefore act as a Gaian temperature regulator called the feedback loop.

With floaters of human energy one will see how human energy is "pulled" into more the more balanced (in the final section of this book) and other means of transfering human energy from the "strong" can in principal balance any system out. Today's futurists have made computer programs that depict the one's having power now will dominate more and mope, but they have never "pulled in" another's energy using floaters are.

Eather 'R Us

Height and depth, inspiration and communication, respectively are as the difference between a good dialog and the telephone answering machine's insentient charm. Not that I don't appreciate telephone recordings, but when an operator told me; appreciating telephone recordings is "a rare case..." I concluded the latter is inure. Separating higher from lower can be done with an idea, two individuals, and making into a boss one of them, all the while not upsetting the peaceful atmosphere of the work place. Productive and counterproductive will be expressed as light that gets separated into a more chaotic light, then back again to it's original form. Light as a good idea is used here because, physical light is also symbolic light, i.e.; shed light, in light of, see the light etc...., when measuring good as opposed to the unclear** Pure light also has credence as healing in countless articles where it plays the role in curing the significant number of Seasonal Affective Disorder.*** Where light represents good or high, and distorted light represents not as high- not "as" good. Statistics like high and not as high, in this way, will be illustrated when one makes one person humble compared to the other (or entropy reversing) by what life only can do. To represent individuals one can barrow a statistic from Fruitof Capra's (Tao of Physics), diagram; the plane and the donut: Fig.; 1.

'A' and 'B' can represent individuals. Except for the donut, 'A' and 'B' do not relate; they are sovereign. "The surfaces of the cut appear as two completely separate discs, but in three dimensions, they are recognized as parts of one and the same object."³. the plane; 'X,' separates the two into two dimensions. But because of the material world, a world of three dimensions- discs, plane, and circle can represent a teem of workers; "All for one, and one for all." The rudiments of the word: unity; being the abstract philosophy- the statistic one hopes to change. Now the circle; 'C,' does not represent individuals but the mystic of teamwork; that which is good, the God-symbol. In any practical group; however, their must be a boss, so A or B must take the lead; all of this without distorting the donut (peace). This is important sense no matter how much equality or potential there is. People must meet together as a social principal and this requires some direction. Also, changing the two person's esteem represents a precise transition from higher to not as high, and visa-versa.

Some rearranging is necessary, but when finished a statistical reversal, a reversal of the unity of 'A' and 'B' will be revealed. 'A' higher, and 'B' lower.

** Philosophical Psychology; Abingdon; Jun 1998; Geir Kirkeboen;

*** Meesters, Ybe; Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Baltimore; Sep 1998; Vol. 17, Iss. 2; pg. 986, 3 pgs Here comes the sun; Camille Chatterjee; Psychology Today, New York; Sep/Oct 1998; Vol. 31, Iss. 5; pg. 18, 1 pgs Color or brightness effects on grip strength?; Dunwoody, Lynn; Perceptual and Motor Skills, Missoula; Aug 1998; Vol. 87, Iss. 1; pg. 275, 4 pgs

On to page 5 Back to page 3 * I hope to include part of this outline in a subsequent chapter.

You are the person to see How to Photograph Floaters