Sunday, July 18, 2010

Luckiest Woman Alive Wins 4th Multi-Million Dollar Jackpot

Once, twice, three times a millionaire -- now it's four.

Joan R. Ginther, a native of Bishop who moved to Las Vegas, made her fourth appearance Monday at lottery headquarters in Austin to collect seven figures, lottery officials said.

Ginther, 63, won $10 million, the top prize in Texas Lottery's $140,000,000 Extreme Payout scratch-off ticket, pushing her total wins to $20.4 million.

It was her third time to win on a ticket from a Bishop store, and second one at Times Market at 525 Highway 77 Bypass, in Bishop.

"This is a very lucky store," said Bob Solis, store manager. The owner Sun Bae is the one with the lucky hand, Solis said. "Sun sold both the winning tickets to the woman."

The store, which sells about 1,000 lottery tickets daily, now is eligible to receive a bonus of $10,000 for the second time, lottery officials said.

"It's incredible for the store owner," said Bobby Heith, spokesman for the commission. "Most of our 16,000 retail stores have never sold a winning ticket."

In 1993 Ginther first won a $5.4 million share of an $11 million Lotto Texas jackpot for a ticket bought in Bishop. She opted for annual payments of $270,000 (excluding tax charges) for 19 years.

On year 13, while visiting Bishop to care for her father in 2006, Ginther won the top prize of $2 million in the Holiday Millionaire game. It was on a $30 scratch-off ticket she bought at Diamond Shamrock at 525 S. 14th St. in Kingsville. Ginther requested a lump-sum payment of about $1.5 million, after the 25 percent taken by the commission for taxes.

Two years later she collected a $3 million prize in Millions and Millions, another scratch-off, at the same Times Market where she won this week.

Ginther requested minimal publicity, according to the lottery commission, and could not be reached Friday.

The commission doesn't calculate the odds of winning millions more than once, Heith said.

"We have had multiple winners before," he said. "But she's obviously been born under a lucky star."

Saturday, May 1, 2010

The Strange Science of Organ Transplant Memory Transfer

The Strange Science of Organ Transplant Memory Transfer


Becoming an organ donor is a great way to help out a person in the event of one's death. A study has shown, however, that sometimes donor recipients take on certain characteristics or personality traits from the donor, a phenomenon that researchers are having a difficult time explaining.

Paul Pearsall, a neuropsychologist, wrote about this interesting topic in his book, The Heart's Code: Tapping the Wisdom and Power of Our Heart Energy. In it, he provides insight into his belief that the physical heart contains within it memories belonging to its person. Part of Pearsall's research for the book included tracking several real life cases of heart transplant recipients who mysteriously inherited some of their donors' traits.

In one case, a Spanish-speaking man began using words that he had not used prior to his transplant. He received his heart from a man named David who had died in a car accident. David's wife, Glenda, when meeting the recipient of her husband's heart for the first time, used the word "copacetic" to describe the situation. The recipient's mother quickly replied that her son had begun using that word for the first time and that it did not even have a Spanish equivalent, indicating that he had adopted the word from David.

The recipient's son, who had before been a vegetarian, began craving meat and greasy food after his transplant. His music preferences also changed from favoring heavy metal to preferring fifties rock 'n' roll. All of these preferences turned out to be David's preferences as well.

In another case, an 8-year-old girl who had received a heart transplant from a 10-year-old girl that had been murdered, began to have nightmares about the donor's murderer. After several consultations with a psychiatrist, it was decided that the police should be notified. The 8-year-old recipient was able to identify key clues about the murder, including who the murderer was, when and how it happened, and even the words spoken by the murderer to the victim. Amazingly, the entire testimony turned out to be true and the murderer was convicted for his crime.

Pearsall's 73 different case studies point to the fact that both the brain and the heart hold important information about a person. According to his analysis, cell communication that occurs throughout the body on a continual basis can continue to occur after an organ has been removed from one person and transplanted into another. Information from the donor seems to install into the recipient's memory.

Critics argue that such a phenomenon is not possible, but the proof is in the cases themselves. In one case, a 3-year-old Arab girl received a heart transplant from an 8-year-old Jewish boy who died in a car accident. After her surgery, the girl asked for a type of Jewish candy that, prior to the surgery, she did not even know existed.

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

How to Be Anywhere in the Universe


By Michael Jura / Source: One Universal Mind

What happens to space/time?

According to the non-locality (bridging of space/time: Space and time does not really exist at the level of particles) principle of quantum physics that was proven experimentally in 1982 by the research team of Alain Aspect working at the Institute of Theoretical and Applied Optics of the university of Paris, France, the inequality of John Bell had been finally violated and the Einstein/Poldowsky/Rosen (E.P.R.) paradox finally solved.

Hence Einstein had been wrong in refuting quantum mechanics principle of non-locality because he had conceptual problems with its extraordinary implications upon our so-called material world and the nature of reality.

To the layman this means that Einstein erred in assuming that speeds faster than light were impossible and/or that space and time did not operate at the quantum level (particle level).

By extension we can say that it seems that our phenomenal world is in reality supported by an indivisible reality, non-local (at that level space does not exist), and non subject to the restrictions of time (time does not seem to have any meaning at that level).

This is equivalent to saying that no element (alive or inanimate) in this universe is separate from another , although at the level of individual perceptions of reality it certainly seems to be so!

This correlates strongly with the Holographic model of the universe that the physicist David Bohm postulated as an explanation for the paradoxes that quantum physics raises.

David Bohm, who was one of the preferred students of Einstein at Princeton University and was part of the ìManhattan project? ( the development of the American A bomb during WW II), was considered before his death in 1992 as one of the greatest theoretical quantum physicist.

Bohm was puzzled by physical phenomenon such as the Quantum-Tunneling effect which is at the base of the semi-conductor theory and gave us the creation of the transistor, microchips, Josephson junctions in Super-Computers etc... where a particle such as an electron seems to know beforehand if a barrier that it will encounter is strong enough to repulse it back, and if this is not the case, the particle literally vanishes (dematerializes) itself before encountering the obstacle and rematerializes itself on the other side of the barrier.

For Bohm who took his clues from the model of the hologram, if as quantum physics suggests our universe is non-local and infinitely interconnected at some deeper level of reality, instead of viewing a particle as a material object traveling through space, it might be better to view it as something that unfolds out of a deeper level of reality that he coined The Implicate Order: a gigantic multidimensional holographic reality (outside of the realm of space/time) made out of vibratory light carrying information that would encompass the totality of Creation.

This Implicate Order would spread its tentacles to every sentient unit of Creation as it goes through a constant dance of unfolding itself into its mirror image as the Explicate World (i.e the reality perceived by our senses) and projects to each observing individualized piece of consciousness the illusion of a material world out there at the level of conscious awareness.

The implicate order ( let's call it the web of life) is where all possibilities are there and time/space has no meaning.

And the Implicate Order keeps on projecting out onto the consciousnesses witnessing the explicate world what we perceive as reality in a step-by-step fashion.

After each unfolding, there is an enfolding back onto the Implicate Order (while the sentient unit of mind become unconscious again) and the fetching of additional pieces of information that will unfold back holographically to the same unit of consciousness (as that unit becomes aware -- conscious -- again of the next step of the show of Creation).

So that in effect what a unit of consciousness considers a flow of situations is but a succession of discontinuous sensory imagery being projected on-and-off to an entity.

Therefore all an entity is, is a processor of information filtered through his senses that it translates as its reality. And that allows him/her to act upon (co-create) it by choosing the next step.

This would explain the reason, if we accept that reality at the macroscopic level is discontinuous under the illusion of continuity, why in Quantum Physics according to the uncertainty principle only the location of a particle at the microscopic level can at any point be precisely described but that its real trajectory cannot be known and remains ìfuzzy?.

It is the contact with the Higher Self (interfacing with the Implicate Order) that allows one to bridge instantly space/time.

This is why Remote Viewing is only possible and effective when one operates from the perspective of the higher levels of the subconscious mind.

If this level of merger with the higher level of the subconscious mind is not reached, too much static (noise) interferes in the viewing and one might fail while attempting to view a remote site in the present, past or future.