The benford's law (how to check for validity of anything using the Law of One)

Strictly Law of One
21

In my opinion, there are simply no alternatives to discernment / intuition.

4 Likes
22

I imagine it would all depends on what conditioned that intuition to begin with. What biases formed that intuition? Is the mind clouding what the higher self is actually trying to tell you or is it coming filtered through a specific kind of lens?

The only way to be able to practice this discernment is to keep yourself balanced or your intuition will also be unbalanced.

Seems simple enough to me. :woman_shrugging:

1 Like
23

:rofl: :green_heart:
I apologize, sometimes we need to “turn up the light” and not forget to shine our brightest selves through the “eyes” of creation. :wink:

This reminds me of when you stare at a computer screen too long and you start to see word lines all over “reality.” LOL Nice meme, I just got it. :joy: :face_with_open_eyes_and_hand_over_mouth:

Do you mean “dualistic” like the binary system of 1’s and 0’s? I’m not sure why but that is what came to mind while reading this again this evening and the first time I read it.

Are you referrring to the different brain waves we experience, like alpha, beta, theta, gamma, etc?

image
image850×737 67.4 KB

I know that we experience each at every activated chakra in our energy bodies. Red is delta, orange is theta, yellow is alpha, etc. I’m pretty sure I watched something about this on YouTube last year. :thinking:

:sun_with_face: :green_heart:

1 Like
24

Considering the subject matter, Discernment is so important that it should not be out-sourced to some dubious mathematical model nor to any other person. It always begs the question: can we accurately assess the reliability of someone else’s discernment? Ra and Q’uo always advise discernment with what comes through.

We must guard against trusting (or discounting) what is said on the basis of who said it. A broken clock can be right twice a day. Critical thinking requires a lot more effort. While I applaud checking for validity, the application of Benford’s law to the Lo1 requires a lot of validation itself. Will mathematical reduction detect internally contradicted statements? What does it do with paradoxes?

3 Likes
25

It’s the inconsistency of “I am Ra,” and “we are Ra,” coupled with the attacks and prior infringement from their negative “companion” that raised questions in relation to this post.

There seems to be a “black/white” perception from what you see in this experiment.
We are not here to spot “fakery” or even remotely close to making “enemies” or “discrediting.”

We are here to recognize that both existence of the polarity is in all.

And to recognize the negative, we are recognizing the creator and thus looking at it without blinking and judging all parts of the creation, nor discard it.

On the other hand,

The freedom for you to discern and my freewill to simply “looking” into the creation shouldn’t raise any “doubt” for you or me.

You and I already know, whether we are aware of it or not.

Good observation, most readers of the materials do recognize this. There’s more to the saga between the three and “others.”

But that stuff is again, for people who wants to dig deeper and understand more about the “stories” of these folks who claim to have made contact with divinity/aliens/god, etc. etc.

Most people are satisfied though with what “resonated”

Devotees from churches and temples all say the same things. Those who read the Loo aren’t very different.

You can see this in the way people become defensive about it, and paraphrase the materials like the bible. (I am guilty of this.)

So the question remains


What makes the Loo different from the “prophets” that are from other religions, and systems of beliefs?

And what have they also brought to this world? The Crusade, The Witch hunt and burning, The beheading under the name of their faith?

Never was it “superior” nor is in the frame of mind between “old” or “new”

It just is

1 Like
26

I agree with this as well Patrick,

Although, if it is balanced, then the discernment/intuition wouldn’t have failed you or me, or anyone at some point in our lives.

We don’t cross the street with our eyes closed and hope that our discernment and intuition will keep us safe, do we?

But we do naturally use rigid and exact measurement like the street lights, and physical oncoming of cars to make our discernment. With a grain of intuition that helps us complete the wholeness of our choices.

I wouldn’t agree with that there is “simply no alternatives,” nor do I seek “alternatives”

Being bias is the first paradox.

2 Likes
27

I enjoy reading this JT, thank you for sharing your thought. It has humor within it’s own context.

But here we are? with the Loo?

So my curiosity/question to this statement is
 Where do you sit with Jim? Carla and Don? Are you accurate with your assessment?
If so, would you mind sharing?

If we all “know” then why are we here?
Why are you here? Why do you read the materials?

We simply “don’t” know, We believe that we know.
But that is exactly what it is.

haha :joy: and that is the ticket right there. Perhaps they are aware as well, that polarities cannot be separated, both positive and negative exist in all.

Or perhaps it’s just a cop-out way for the writer to get out of sticky legal disclaimer.

Just for a reminder that the entire basis of the Loo is that there is an “afterlife” and you can “re-do”

If you would extend your empathy to those who are struggling mentally, or physically. This opens the door for folks to do almost “anything.”

This goes both positive and negative.

Some may take this and love everyone, some may take this information and hurt others.

If the case is big enough


Let say, a mass shooter that base their ideology on this belief system like the Christchurch shooter.

Oh boy,

If I was a writer of such materials, I would put a disclaimer on it, with or without my lawyers suggestion.

:joy: beautifully said, and that is why we are here.

You see, Don was the only one that used pragmatism and had scientific background in this research.

Right now, Rock Creek, Jim and the gang are running this show based on “spiritualism”

Which can falls under occult, or religious without any true structural examination.

I have suggested to them about using a EEG like this one https://www.emotiv.com/insight/?campaignid=19603055892&adgroupid=144168743503&network=g&device=c&utm_term=eeg%20headphones&utm_source=google&utm_medium=ppc&utm_content=646162309631&utm_campaign=Competitors&hsa_acc=5401365090&hsa_cam=19603055892&hsa_grp=144168743503&hsa_ad=646162309631&hsa_src=g&hsa_tgt=kwd-524576812532&hsa_kw=eeg%20headphones&hsa_mt=p&hsa_net=adwords&hsa_ver=3&gclid=Cj0KCQjwiZqhBhCJARIsACHHEH8lsX_Rg70OuwtORdSUCyE9yB-pyh01fcgArgtMMBca8z6ZLCxchGwaAqq8EALw_wcB

and actually find base lines between each transmissions, etc.

For something that is about Energy, Vibration, and Frequency. This seems to be a “no-brainer”

Don’t you think Don would have used this technology and pushed out research papers based on how meticulously he does his work?

Of course, if he was still here. But it makes sense to me that he was taken out, and was a secondary target.

I love this, but here’s the thing
 How do you know? if you don’t see the sun?
Do you wear your watch inside a windowless room?

Why do you wear a watch? its an instrument of determining exact measurement of time.

Benford’s law is a similar instrument as well in this sense.

It’s possible, based on the “phenomenon” with Benford’s law. This creation has a built in system that “measure.”

Remember, We did not “invent” math. We simply discovered it.

My mathematician friends will tell you that paradoxes is the nature of math.

We only see what we want to see, and this is usually 100% when it comes to internal discernment/intuition.

If it is 7am. It is 7am, no matter how much you discern and intuit

2 Likes
28

I do not exclude anything from the process of discernment / intuition. It does not mean you should not trust what your eyes are seeing. It is as a whole that this process works.

What I meant is that one should not disregard the whole and then only take the numbers shown on the dice, or the swing of a pendulum, etc. alone without regard to how they feel or what else they see, etc.

I’ve done many experiments with pendulums and it is my opinion that they are very easily manipulated by nefarious forces. One would need to dedicate a magically protected space and time (a clean space and a clean self) to have any hope of getting any “good” results.

I have seen seekers led astray because they trusted their tool so much that they taught themselves to mute what their discernment / intuition was telling them.

At first, they felt unease with some results but decided the tool was always right. Over time, this unease fell away. Leaving them pray to whatever had control of their tool.

5 Likes
29

I can only assess the content of the material. It is not ALL truth. There is no single repository of all truth. Everyone gets a little piece of it. That’s why we need each other. Shared perspective gives us depth. I don’t find merit of message because of the channel/messengers. The content itself has provided insight and perspective in the nature of experience. That’s why I study it.

I’ve done my share of metaphysical education and research. I knew of the Law of One back in the early 70s. I’ve been practicing deep meditation since 1974. I found the Ra material a few years ago. I have experienced things that give me the solid certainty that I am more than this body, this mind, this life and the narrative. This I’ve known since my early 20s.

2 Likes
30

Right! Being balanced with discernment is exactly what I meant.
Both intuition and physical indicators are necessary.

Whether if it was something “inside” that didn’t feel right, or what “outside” didn’t look right.

Both requires sound judgement from the “wholeness” of being “aware.”

This is the a tricky one,

because what if the intuition came first? and the physical experiment came after to further examine that discernment.

isn’t this is what Don did?

he started with a “hunch” 
 An “inner” feeling that there is more, and so he went out to seek and validate this.

Sometimes the evidence come up first, sometime its the feelings. Both play and pushes one another to explore further.

What kind of tools though? is it metaphysical in nature? like pendulum, Quija board, tarots? etc.

If the nature of such tool doesn’t have any scientific consistency with it, and it amplifies ones inner imagination or “intuition” without the capability to confirm
 Then yes, I think that is absolutely terrible and could be subjected to manipulation or infringement by “something” or maybe even themselves!

But if the thing is a calculator
 then how do we say that 1+2=3 was manipulated by some kind of negative entity?

The benford’s experiment is a showcase of the interesting phenomenon that happens in math/numbers, where things are naturally “singular”
 Almost like a law with consistent definitive outcome. But if it was manipulated or messed with, the inconsistency will show.

I do have to admit that it would be ironic if the coincidence between the Law of One, and the experiment doesn’t have ANY connection whatsoever.

2 Likes
31

So before I say anything, I do want to reiterate that most of my logic and observation are made based on the information from the original materials.
If we take a step back and make a quick summary about the materials


Basically there are good guys that want to help us, give us universal knowledge with their messages/channeled. But these messages are often intercepted and messed with by the bad guys.

The 10 commandments, the Quran, old testament, and new testament. Etc. etc. Were all “mixed” to a certain degree. So when we look at this pattern, it’s safe to say the bad guys are pretty much everywhere when it comes to “messages” etc.

Right! so where are the exemption made with what we have here? Other than our personal discernment/intuition?

But wait, there’s more!

The materials doesn’t just “exist” and gives no credits to it’s “creators” or publishers.
There were efforts made by the organization to showcase the “messengers” or the “staff”

You know what I am saying?
Imagine you showing someone Loo for the first time.

Questions that arises would be like,

-“Who wrote this?” 

“Aliens from different dimension” 


-“Ok
 who wrote it, or recorded, or spoke it, or whatever though?” 

“Oh, these guys and this organization” 


-“Ok
 who are these guys?” 
 “And what happened to the main guy?”
 “There is a whole charade about positive vs negative? and they mess with messages and stuff?” 

“yeah
 basically there’s these bad aliens that just get into everything that is spiritual/metaphysic and turns it bad
 Like all the dark side of religions, and stuff.”

-“ok
 So
 these guys that wrote this stuff
 they are exempt from the whole charade?”
“well
 no
 not really
 they catch it too
”

-“ok ok
 So you have Aliens from different dimension, who is trying to bring love and peace, and they tells you there are bad guys that mess with stuff
 So
 Isn’t this is like saying
 ‘Don’t trust anyone’
? Including the person saying it?”

“No
 well, you see
 the good aliens does tell the reader to use their own discernment and only take what resonate.”

“Ok
 so
 what if it’s a bad guy read the materials? Is it like reverse uno? and they also discern and pick out the negative part of the message?.. Like a free for all? But how do we know that the message or messenger is legit?”

“Well, you use your discernment, and feel it out
 If you don’t resonate with it, then that’s it.”

“What? but isn’t this is what people do in other religions as well?.. But wait
 didn’t they say the bad aliens mess with everything?.. So how do we know this wasn’t messed with?”

“Because all is well, and people are spiritual here, love and light bro
”
“oh
 okay
 got it
”

This is a snippets of an average conversation surrounding someone who is new to the materials.
When asked the Who? What? Where? When? Why? 
 Things aren’t really straight shot.

But we can’t deny that the messages within the original contact with Ra does put Carla’s background as an English major into very good work.

The materials gives a very well written understanding, and teachings that shares similar concept and belief systems from other spiritual/religious entities.

One of it’s strongest point and also attraction was the way Don questioned the whole experiment in a scientific manner.

He didn’t go in saying “Jesus, my lord and savior
” or “shiva this, shiva that.”

I am just curious why things aren’t continued in this manner, when it was originally started as such.

But my friend, what you said above contradict what’s below. The “I and I am” in your experiences are from personal accounts.

Without a shared or unbiased account, we can’t just have a personal experience from another person to be imposed.

It beckons the questions like
 “But how do you know?” and if you do, how do you share this with us without just saying “I know.”

Do you have evidences what we are looking at IS the same thing? Like 1+2=3 on a calculator

The last piece to this paradox is that 


How much of it is a belief? and how much of it is knowing?
What if you never read the Loo? would your concept of reality still remain the same? or did we adopt this philosophy from another person? another entity?

Coming full circle,

If it is adopted
 Wouldn’t you want to discern and examine this relative truth?

2 Likes
32

As a true observer, I thought I’d add my “2 cents” to the mix and share some material from a perspective of “identifying” rather than one of “judgement.”

We came across a YouTube video last month after reading an article or forum post (I can’t seem to recall where
 :thinking: ) where someone was mentioning that Don was trying to “artificially simulate alien contact” prior to making “contact” with Ra.

Here is the description that goes with the video. It shows a clip of Carla and Don being interviewed back in the 70s about what they were trying to “accomplish.”

image
image1310×1068 250 KB

Kind of like “a pendulum, eternally swaying from the dark to the light?”

Following anything “blind” requires “one” to gather as much data as possible to back up everything they need to “use discernment” in order to further “understand.” Other wise, you would just “know” and discernment wouldn’t be necessary would it?

If time is a “construct,” then how can you determine when that “broken clock” is actually correct? Feels like another paradox somehow


This reminds me something I read in a book called, “The Untethered Soul.”

If one was in a windowless room/house, would you have any idea of what was “outside” that room/house? Or would you have to have faith that there was day and night cycles happening regardless of you being “aware” of them? Just something to ponder


This reminds me of a documentary I watched last year about the nature of “infinity.”

What “nefarious” forces would find it necessary to “mess” with a pendulum? Does it matter what one is using it for? Are you talking about the “metaphysical” properties of a pendulum or the “physical” aspects?

How Does Pendulum Dowsing Work?

A pendulum works by tapping into your intuition and sixth sense. The pendulum acts as a form of receiver and transmitter, from your higher guidance, guardian angels and spiritual teachers. As the pendulum moves, you gain answers in response to questions – it is best suited to use to answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’ questions. Some people describe the way a pendulum works as being like bringing together the rational and intuitive sides of you (the left and right sides of your brain). When these two elements are brought together, you’re able to make decisions using all the sources, rather than just one of them.

Where Do The Answers Come From?

Many people wonder where the answers come from and debate whether it’s really working, or just the pendulum responding to the movement of the user’s hand. Whilst the pendulum can certainly be made to move with your hand movements, this isn’t the case always and after practice you’ll get to see why. As with any form of divination, using a pendulum involves a certain degree of faith, belief and a decidedly open mind, as the answers come from your intuition and from higher spiritual guides.

We have seen this technique being utilized by “energy readers” with tarot cards, especially those specializing in the concept of “soul mates.” What “forces” would be “influencing” or “manipulating” this energy?

:sweat_smile: :upside_down_face:

If one fails to see the humor in this
 we aren’t going to explain it any better.

It’s like the “Law of Squares,” right? :wink:

We’ve had the pleasure of meeting several “long term” Law of One students over the “years” and they all seem to share the same perspective and “energetic signature.”

One must wonder if there is a connection to the amount of “time” studying the material and how it affects one in the “long term.”

What if the “original” material was “lacking” that personal touch and therefore the conscious channelings were a way of “correcting” that from the Law of One?

I know that I always found the conscious channelings to have more “heart” than the “original” material, but it always depends on who is “channeling” said material, what questions are being asked, etc. etc.

I know that when I spent time interacting with the OSWG and the other Law of One forums last year, many members were commenting on the “content and quality” of the “new Q’uo channelings” made from that group. We noticed right away that something was “off” about it, as it didn’t follow the same “pattern” or “format” as the other, and you can clearly see one’s “personality” being “channelled” into the material. If one “channeling” was more “logical,” then the material “channelled’ would follow suit.

During this time, we noticed that even within L/L’s channelings since Carla passed away, the “format and pattern” changed drastically from prior to her “passing.”

They would ask questions in a very specific format, never really deviating too much from one “channeller” to the next. It was fairly “consistent” with “questionable” aspects.

In the last couple of years, we found that the “questions asked” have been far more confusing. There was one last year where they asked straight up if “Q’uo” could tell them who all the “service to self” entities on the planet were. I am having difficulty recalling where I saw it but I read it last year
 but that leads into


Based on the patterns of the “original” Law of One, and the conscious channeling library that I’ve studied extensively, it’s obvious that something changed very recently. It feels strange that it aligns with their “mysterious” million dollar donator that seems to make it so they can go to Europe every summer now. :thinking:

Prague Gathering - August 14, 2022
We would also offer to this circle an affirmation that the individuals serving as instruments commented on before the circle began. And that is the one known as Carla has joined this circle, indeed not just for this moment but for your entire time together throughout this gathering. She holds each within this group with a warm embrace and a bright, radiant smile of pride and happiness that you may join together as you have. 1

image
image1034×705 174 KB

How lovely! :sun_with_face:

3 Likes
33

One eye sees one thing. The other eye has a slightly different perspective. Together they see depth. Similarly, two or more people can share notes to get a deeper understanding.

We take it on faith that other people are conscious. Can we ever be 100% certain of anything? If I were to describe to you details of your house, how many details would be sufficient to say I had really been there and not made a good guess?

4 Likes
34

Just to add to my earlier post
 I found a perfect example of an “inconsistency” that I don’t quite understand.

From November 10, 2022:

Gary

Thank you, Q’uo. That was
 I took inspiration from that. I would like to know if I’m a wanderer. And if so, what density I am from?

Q’uo

We are those of Q’uo, and we are aware of the query, my brother. Though we can recognize that this particular question comes from a place of desiring to understand the self in its truest and most basic form in pure intention, we feel that this particular line of questioning is one that would, if spoken to, infringe upon the free will of the question-asker.

We would also add that this particular set of information the questioner seeks, though it may provide a sense of relative comfort or understanding, is ultimately not for the instrument to, as you may say, know at this time. The designation of wanderer or density is ultimately not of great import for the seeker in this incarnation, at least in the sense of having concrete, unmoving proof or identification as such.

What the questioner may mine from this particular line of query, though, is an opportunity to witness the self and observe the self through the eyes of the self’s inner guides or higher self. We would venture further in this direction by stating that the motivation for knowing this information may highlight a larger desire on the part of the questioner. Therefore, we would suggest that the questioner sit with what is motivating the self to ask or seek this confirmation or this information. For we feel that the identification itself is a guidepost or a magnet, a compelling force towards or one of attraction, for the soul to discover something larger about the self, for the soul to understand that which it truly seeks.

The classification of the self as that which is this or not this, is perhaps a larger question of where the self can find unity within separation, where one can explore the connectedness of all that overrides these aspects of our illusion, that identify and classify and group self and other self.

Perhaps that is the seed that will allow the seeker desiring such information the inspiration or direction in which to pursue, to take into moments of silence and to ask of their higher self their intuition.

I found this very strange because when I spent a huge chunk of last year studying and reading “wanderer” quotes, there was a channeling that confirmed that Gary was indeed a wanderer, yet here he is, asking if he’s a wanderer.

Through multiple transcripts from their podcast, I found that Gary talked as if he already knew he was a “wanderer.” Maybe I am interpreting this wrong, what do y’all think?

“In the Now” - Episode 54
Jim

Well, Ra mentioned that when wanderers incarnate on earth are completely the entity of third density. If they wish, they can have a certain tendency towards learning about spiritual principles because that’s pretty much the home density in which they survive and live. But other than that, depending upon what pre-incarnative choices they’ve made, wanderers can learn anything through any particular catalyst that you could mention.

So, they may or may not have a sense of self-acceptance or self-rejection. Ra said there are basically three reasons for wanderers coming to earth. Firstly, they come basically to help lighten the planetary vibration. Secondly, they are able to remember that they’re a wanderer from elsewhere and that they’re here to be of service. They learn that remembering this helps them to increase their personal polarization a great more rapidly than if they had not remembered. Thirdly, sometimes there’s a need to go through either more wisdom training or more compassionate training. Those are the two basic lessons after we get out of third density. The fourth density is the compassion and love and the fifth density is the wisdom. Then in sixth density we balance those two. So, we’re working with love and light, with wisdom and compassion.

When wanderers go through the end of fifth density and start going through sixth density need to recapitulate—either one or the other—wisdom or compassion to be sure they’re in balance. They’re going to need to be in balance in sixth density. So, there may be something in the way of compassion that they would need to learn that might look like self-rejection.

My own experience with that is that for most of my life I got angry at myself for making little mistakes. I’d get angry every time I broke a tool, sawed a line crookedly, or hammered a nail crookedly. I just broke all kinds of things throughout my life, which was a symbol of me getting angry at myself. Ra suggested that this was a program whereby I wanted to balance the wisdom that I had by increasing my compassion.

The way that that can be done is through what Dr. Michael Newton called ‘the opposites programming’. You program a lack of compassion if you’re trying to get more compassion. And for a positively-oriented entity, you program that for yourself. It wouldn’t be appropriate to program it for other people that would be of a negative orientation.

So, for 68 years of my life I had that quality where I would get angry at myself for making all kinds of goofy mistakes—dropping something, fumbling, you know, just anything. It finally ended for me in August of 2015 when I finally learned how to love myself.

So, I would say anything is possible for a wanderer. What would you say, Gary?

Gary

I’d say that was a great reply and like, you, I think the wanderer can learn any lesson that’s available. So, in my reply I dove into possible reasons that self-rejection may be developed. I think any third density being, especially on this planet regardless of where their soul came from, is very much subject to developing self-rejection at some point in their incarnation or in one of their incarnational cycles. I think that there are two reasons for this. First one is that rejection is unavoidable just by simply existing in this matrix where people are separated and are often at odds with one another. Here, energies of judgement or ridicule, scorn, hostility or other varieties of non-acceptance are or can be the norm. Simply put, where people are shitty to one another, can cause one to feel and develop a sense of self-rejection.

But regardless of how many external sources for self-rejection are identified, at the end of the day, those are only proximate causes. The first fundamental and ultimate cause of self-rejection is simply a lack of self-knowledge. When our identity is small and rests upon the opinions of others, or is measured against societal standards, then we are set up or practically guaranteed to find fault in ourselves. We analyze ways that we don’t seem to meet those standards and how we are less than. When we know who we truly are, we need no validation from the world. So whereas self-rejection is a contraction, an illusory “NO” forced upon the self, self-knowledge is a discovery and an acceptance of the final “YES” of self. It needs no justification. Beingness is a self-luminous rightness—if that makes sense. That is how I see it.

I’m still working on at chipping away at self-rejection. Much of my mentality used to be caught inside of that very small, constricted space of self-rejection. It’s only through many years of growth that I’ve incrementally come to say that I’m okay as I am.

But for the wanderer in particular, there are added reasons for feeling self-rejection including a subconscious sense of being different or other than. They can end up feeling, shall we say, alien. They might be able to sense the variance between the vibrations of home where everybody basically loved each other and the vibrations of this environment where love is not automatic. The wanderer could even develop a rejection of this environment itself that translates into a self-rejection.

The wanderer could, say, not be good in conversation and say really dumb things or be/feel that they are very white and wanting darker skin. They could be doing a podcast and wonder if they’re saying anything helpful at all and I may be getting personal here. [Laughs]

Austin

Who are you talking about? [Laughs]

Gary

But, yeah, there’s some thoughts on the development of self-rejection by Gary Bean. Back to you, Austin.

2 Likes
35

I’m afraid I have not much else to share on the subject. Such things are best explored and poundered individually. I only wish the best to all seekers on their path. May you all be guided truly.

“What you seek is seeking you” ~ RĆ«mÄ«

4 Likes
36

Hmm
 :thinking:

2 Likes
37

While pondering about this further this evening, we “stumbled” upon a fascinating article.

I’m not a statistical kind of “gal” but this seems related. What do y’all think?

2 Likes
38

yes, that I know, that you know, that I know, that you know. :joy:

Well, I know that there is “more” to existence beyond metaphysical or scientific speculation.

I feel that this is where we all, not just you and me, but everyone share this innate “knowing”

For the house thing, there is a device called Ring at the front door, so I’d know, and also there is a physical uniqueness that no one can really guess right unless they saw the object in person.

It’s beautiful what you said here because it shows the limitation of both physical and metaphysical perception

3 Likes
39

Thank you for bringing it back to the OP!

I appreciate the other information about Rock Creek and their controversies, that is definitely left for individual person to discern.

This reddit post about truncated data sets basically is asking if the data was “shortened” or censored, aka truncated. Then would the benford’s law will still be able to apply.

The short answer is that, yes. If there are enough data.

I think 106 sessions and the 1500+ session does have sufficient data.

If it was like only 5 sessions that is published out of the 106, then that would be difficult for what we are doing here.

Right now, it’s just to see the “consistency” of Ra in the 106
 and whoever is on the 1500+

Thanks for those contribution Funky, they are very helpful!

much light!

3 Likes
40

Patrick, you have good points and your sharing is valuable.

It is much easier for everyone to move a boulder together my friend.

3 Likes