Memory Palace - A Book - the easy way of memorizing PI (or everything) with help of your Major System

General Memory Chat
1

Hey there,

I will outline how to memorize PI, or everything, the easy way. Following this method you will be able to recall every digit in its right place and will be able to tell which the Xth figure of PI is.

The method is very simple and has no limits.
As a beginner in the “Memory-Palace field” I thought about a creative and appealing Memory Palace. Since I am very fond of reading I thought there is nothing that could qualify better for a Memory Palace as a book itself!

A book holds, as we all now: words, wisdom and knowledge. And each page has something printed on.
Therefore words, wisdom and knowledge are bound to a specific page of a book. If you quote out of a book you have to cite the page. Therefore, as it were, words and sentences can be traced back to the right place in the right book, if cited correctly.

Lets use this way of thinking for our objective to memorize PI.
You will need:
- Your personal Major System (e.g. 00-99) [I decided to use my single digit system for pages 1-9]

Now imagine a book. It will be blank at this point in time. Put a π (PI sign) on its cover. Browse throw it, you will see blank pages except for the page numbers in a corner of your choice. These are your Major System Pictures.

You will have to take a step back and think for a minute:
- How many pictures from your Major System you are going to place on each page

As a beginner, I chose 4 pictures. That means that I am going to memorize 8 figures per page.

Lets begin.
Page 1 of your book will entail figures “31 41 59 26” if you follow my personal approach of 4 images per page.
[I am german, therefore my system is not english]
- “x” = german; (X) = digit; = english translation for the german word
- I imagine a Tree (1), that is the first page
- Along this Tree a “Motte” (31) [moth] is riding on a “Ratte” (41) [rat].
This little fellow is holding a “Lupe” (59) [magnifier] to inspect a “Nische” (26) [niche] in the tree.

I think this is a rather appealing way for memorizing PI.

I claimed it would be possible to recall every digit in its right place. Lets have a look:
- What is the 104th figure of PI ?

 - In order to answer, I have to find out on which page of my book the 104th figure is listed: 
               -> 8 x 10 = 80 (that would be the 10th page)
               -> 8x    3 = 24 (that would be the   3th page)
       - I know, that the 104th figure of PI is hiding on the 13th page.
  • Page 13 stands for “Damm” (13) [dam].
  • “Käse” (70) [cheese] is running down the dam right into a “Jacke” (67) [coat] that already smells after “Bifi” (98).
    My little “Hund” (21) [dog] loves it and is eating the whole package.
    > Therefore the 104th figure is 1, the second part of the word “Hund” [dog].

It is the first time I ever used this kind of system and I think it is rather nice to use. The book is in a bookshelf in my memory palace and it is ready for usage.

  • I think it is a great advantage of this way of memorizing that you don’t have to remember the loci itself. The book has simply pages and you know that each page contains information. Therefore you can browse very fast and can jump over pages to find the information required. The only thing that you have to remember are the links between page and PI.

It took me like 10 minutes to come up with this idea and memorize 100 digits. Do you think it is a strong technique?

I am open for criticism and feedback. Since I have never seen this approach for memorizing anything.

Best wishes,
Suzy

2 Likes
2

Hi Suzy, Thanks for using PI. It makes your example easy to understand. (I think you intended to type 31 not 32) I’m testing it now against my journeys, and it’s working well. For clarity, I’m trying to link PI (the title) with the page numbers, but that may be unnecessary.
Next, I’ll try this method to remember a book. Three or four key points per page depending of the book. Instead of starting my pages at 1 (tree) i would use 00 for author /title etc. The first page would then be 01. Looking forward to input from others.

3

Hi dinob,
thanks for your reply and for pointing out the mistyping. “Moth” certainly stands for 31.
I see the methods wide-ranging applicability. But also I see its probable weakness:

Each “Memory Palace” (imagined book) follows the same system of encoding the information. That is to say, that you are always using your Major System for the primal connection between loci and the content.
So how to distinguish between several “Memory Palaces”, namely books?

That is a issue I will think about more strongly and where I am grateful for further suggestions.
Maybe colors would help to distinguish between different “Memory Palaces”.

What are your thoughts on that?
Regards, Suzy.

4

I have the same concern and want to see if linking the title to each page overcomes it. Since the title of this “book” is PI, I’ll link each ‘page loci’ to the same big messy pumpkin pie. For example, your page 1 Tree could be growing out of the pie. The Dam (page 13) could be holding back the big messy pumpkin pie. The cheese could still be running down the front, and everything remains the same. To keep it clean, I’ll use the same pie and see it touching each page loci , but I might change how it interacts depending on the scene.
For the book The Time Machine a clock could be linked to each page loci.
Hope this makes sense. I like the concept.

5

Hey there,

thanks for your reply dinob. I think your way of linking the cover to the actual pages is quite nice but I found a better way to solve the issue. Maybe the following also applies to you.
I am exploring the system further and I begin to like it more and more. I raised the concern, that it might be difficult to distinguish between several books, if the system is used more often.

After several efforts of storing different types of information, following my initial remarks, I do opine that different “Memory Palaces” do not interfere with each other if the issue is properly dealt with.

I thought about a way to implement the foundation of imaginable books as memory palaces for history dates.
What I did:

I imagine several small rooms shaped like honeycombs. I follow a maze-model that was used in the book: “The Name of the Rose”. Each room symbolizes a century and is very different from the others. If we go into the small room of the 19th century we will have potential dates to memorize: 18XX. “XX” = 00-99.

And now comes the trick. Following my Major System 18 stands for “Taufe” [baptism]. Therefore, in the middle of the honeycomb shaped room stands a baptismal font. Also water is dripping from the walls; not a cosy room at all. Inside the font lies a book, which is the actual Memory Palace. Kind of as in Harry Potter :smiley: when Dumbledore drank out of that nasty pit.
Since I know that the Memory Palace (Book) lies in the baptism font, I am aware that every single page begins with 18. the following two figures are the actual page numbers.

I wanted to memorize the “imperial coronation of Napoleon in 1804”

“04” stands for Zorro (the guy with the black hoodwink and the epee). Therefore, on page 04 (the page of Zorro), Zorro is fighting with Napoleon who has no weapon, but holds his hands in his coat, like he always does. The letter is winning somehow, using crazy skills, and as a result Zorro has to put a crown on Napoleons head.

  • Following this way of memorizing I am not at all confused with other books I have used so far.

The key is to have different places with different atmospheres. It works quite well.

What are your thoughts on that?

Greetings,
Suzy.

1 Like
6

Hi Suzy, After several attempts i can’t seem to make this system work for me. I tried to make each ‘page loci’ stand out but I kept confusing the loci with the actual pi number . A strong atmosphere may be the trick, but I’m afraid I’ll wind up in the same pace. So, I’m back to using my standard journey/palace method, but I had a lot of fun trying this technique. Thanks for the idea. Hope to hear how you make out.

7

Hi dinob,

I am sorry to hear that you dropped the system and that it apparently does not adequately work for you and your purposes.
For me on the other side it still works perfectly. Just now I tried to recall the first 800 digits of PI (after almost a month of the initial memorization process) and I did fairly well. Following the principles of the system displayed above, I was able to store more history dates over time quite easily. And I also found it to be very useful to memorize law (article of a law).

But I really think, concerning the system I proposed, the difference between me and you comes down to a more or less universally distinction between people.
In the “Memory-Community” itself there seems basically to be two kinds of people, which could be categorized as the following.
This topic for itself is rather interesting I think:

Some tend to use and create artificial memory palaces for the sake of storing information.
Some tend to use and follow real places as memory palaces for the stake of storing information.

I think this tells us something about people and the way they tend to memorize abstract information. But I am not sure what can be learned of it.

Regards as always,
Suzy

8

Suzy, what do you think attracts some people to artificial Memory Palaces and others to MPs based on real locations?

In other words, are there predictors we could gather so that when teaching these techniques, we’re better able to help more people use them because we know the kind of MPs they’re most likely to find attractive?

9

I’ve been experimenting with MPs from both real places and video
games.

One of the major things that attracts me to video game MPs is that I
can conceivably place a large body of related information in one
distinct world.

For example, books about learning Spanish, Spanish vocab, quotes
memorized in Spanish, etc could all go in the map of GTA: San Andreas
and that whole world can be my Spanish memory palace with many
journeys through it. I find the sense of organization comforting, and
I know I can always find new worlds to use, for instance the valve
games (Half-Life, Counter-strike, etc) have tons of maps and you can
create new maps, and you can move through the worlds quickly and
easily.

I used a real life journey when reading Lewis Smile’s book. It worked
fine, except that I had trouble visualizing some details since I used
my childhood neighborhood that I haven’t lived in for 10 years - plus
the neighborhood consists of hundreds of identical houses. However, I
could feel enough distinct locations to use as loci in the
journey. With this resolution of recall, I’d definitely have trouble
generating thousands of loci. And even in places that I can visualize
with high resolution, it just doesn’t feel pleasant to see the stove,
the fridge, the table… yuck. And for a large body of knowledge I’m
inevitably going to need to jump around to unrelated locations.

I am working on improving my recall of real life locations, but I
think they are going to be reserved for special use cases - I don’t
see myself storing large bodies of practical knowledge in MPs from
real life.

Here are some more benefits that attract me to virtual memory palaces
(I’m not considering MPs built only in the imagination, but MPs that
actually exist virtually in video games, etc):

  • no real life emotional content static (physical places change with
  • time) easy to visualize/recall (less information than real life
  • places, and more cartoon quality) easy to review by playing through
  • (if you pick the right source… some games work better than others)
  • can construct new MPs in virtual worlds (can design any MP I want
  • and experience it in game) more fun… my childhood neighborhood in
  • the suburbs is extremely boring and repetitive, good games have more
  • distinct features in the landscape

One more example. I played the James Bond game Golden Eye on Nintendo
64 when I was a kid. There’s very few levels that I put much time
into, yet I can recall and feel myself moving through Golden Eye
levels as easily as any real life place I’ve ever been. Recalling the
walk from my house to my friend’s house where I went everyday after
school is more tedious to recall, less pleasant (again… rows of
identical houses), and my recall is spotty (the top of the hill, front
of the driveway). On the otherhand recalling Golden Eye levels, I fit
many more loci into a smaller space, the spaces are much more
distinct.

Using a suburban neighborhood as an example is kind of a strawman,
because I’ve also lived in places with more distinguishable features,
but even then I have similar problems, but to less of a degree.

Overall, I’d say the attraction is lack of emotional content and more
fun.

I’ve been working a little with removing/changing the emotional
content of my recall of real life places, and I think there is some
promise there, but again, I plan on using those real life places for
special purposes, not for general learning.

10

Cool stuff, AgentCooper.

When I’ve used video games, I’ve stuck to single screen platform games, Donkey Kong in particular. I’ve got 23 stations on level one of the game and it’s good for memorizing different limited sets.

With respects to neighborhoods and hundreds of houses, for me intersections work best. But I’ll take the interior of a building any day to using external words. 4 corners in a building full of rooms with corners is always more powerful for me than dozens of trees in a mostly disorganized space with no end.

11

Hi guys,

I think artificial MPs have big advantages over MPs based on real locations, but naturally also big disadvantages.

artificial MP:
-requires a lot of imagination (and imagination has to be fostered)
+is very personal and therefore if done properly very strong as a storage place.
+can follow a logic sequence. Like I did in the initial post.
+can be altered

real location:
-you need to know the location very well.
-sequence has to be learned
-limited
+easy to visualize
+strong emotional connection possible

Thats what I spontaneously came up with. I think AgentCooper did tell us one thing that has to be scrutinized.
He talked about “virtual” MPs. I think they are not different from MPs based on real locations. Because they are not created by ones imagination, but by someone else. Therefore, I would put virtual in the same category as actual.

The big difference clearly is, that MPs can have no connection to this physical or virtual world. They are only there if you “close your eyes”. The others have to be experienced in our physical world.

Imagine you would use your brain-power to create one MP that is growing as you learn, where everything is stored, like an expanding universe.

To put my thoughts in a nutshell,
I think MPs created by imagination are the thing for people who read a lot and are philosophic.
I think MPs based on the physical world are the thing for people who are analytical and attentive.
The mixture of both could be the key. I use actual places for the necessity of spontaneous needed memorization.

In my view, memorization techniques foster the imagination capacity of ones brain. Therefore, MPs created by imagination are the pinnacle of the art of memorization.

Regards,
Suzy

1 Like
12

Hi Suzy!

I hope this is not too old a thread so as to not interest you anymore. I find it really appealing and it exactly matches one of my main concerns towards the Art of Memory: the availability and organisation of memory palaces.

I must state up-front that I am less than a beginner. A few months ago, I began learning about these techniques with excitement, but dropped it temporarily after trying to create a PAO system which was too complicated for a total beginner (I always like to complicate things). I have just now resumed my memory studies by sticking to the basics, but what stirs my interest is always what is not there. Hence, this post.

Nowadays, I use a system to “read well” any book I find my interest landing on, that goes from simple annotations to summarisation and to the final production of flash-cards in Anki that contain the gist of the information. While I find Anki really useful, it is not good for lists and it does not make huge amounts of information readily available in your memory on request. I believe the Art of Memory has the answers for these problems.

However, (again, this is the opinion of someone who is less than a beginner) I believe actual memory palaces (your “actual” term, including both real and virtual) (i) are limited, (ii) demand a lot of extra-work and (iii) inherently lack organisation. I do find them fascinating though.

I dream about a system entirely geared toward long-term memorisation of general knowledge. I know there are a lot of very interest posts in this forum regarding e.g., the verbatim memorisation of entire books, but none of them are totally satisfying to me – at least, not enough to derive my full commitment to them. I think such a system should have two main aspects, one of them being a totally adaptable imaginary memory palace. In fact, it is not a memory palace I think about, but a method to derive imaginary memory palaces on-the-fly as you need them. By “on-the-fly”, I don’t necessarily mean “as you memorize the information”. It could be something like: you first read an entire book, summarise it and extract the gist of what you want to learn; then you create your memory palace using “the” method and begin placing the images.

I have read many posts about using imaginary memory palaces, but, although I am flabbergasted by your ability of using an imaginary book as a memory palace, I am almost certain that you are NOT using one of your brain’s greatest abilities for memorization, which is spatial memory.

What I dream about is to find some aspect of the neurophysiology of the brain and of how memories are formed, so as to derive a way of “feeling as if you had been in a given place” without actually having been there. I am sure you have had this feeling at least once in your life, a déjà-vu-like feeling. I wonder if we could emulate that so as to use imaginary memory palaces exactly like we use actual memory palaces. Does that make sense to you?

I wrote this post as if I were only talking to Suzy, but, of course, I would love to hear from any of you guys.

All the best to you all and Happy New Year!

Tammish.

13

Hi Tammish,

reading your post really was a joy to me. As time passed I gained more experience with the little technique mentioned in the main post, which still is a strong tool of mine.

I worked through it again and memorized with very little effort the first 1000 figures of PI, and I am totally confident in recalling its figures since I changed it to a 5 information system. This makes the localization of PI very easy. If you asked for the 467th figure of PI I would calculate 467/10 = 46.7; therefore I have to go to page number 47 and recall the 4th picture, which leads me to figure “5”. And it is that simple.

You are wrong I think, in saying that this method would leave out spatial memory. Once you try to become better with visualizing objects you will “feel” the connections between the pictures. And I do kind of feel where to go, it is as if I would actually read something.
I have studied my list of PI now 3 times since original memorization with a lot of time between each revisions. The improvement I made is extraordinary, such a great experience, where I changed each time something that was too “gray” before.

There is so much space for emotion, color, pictures within the “abstract” world… it is in the long term not necessary to have a “real” anchor for these binding elements, if you are not going for competitive memorization and medium-term memory. You might need it at the beginning, but you leave it later on (see below for more about thought).

When I create a learning sheet for school studies on my whiteboard I often feel the place where I put it while being in the exam. I know that there is something I left out and I often involuntarily remember where I wrote it down and what followed the original note.

I also make notes to everything I read and try to make good documentations. I have never tried to memorize these informations, because I do not think it would be worth the effort. If confronted with a homework, I anticipate which book might contain a helpful quote or peace of information. That really is sufficient to me.

Memorizing cards helped a lot experiencing the world of memorization. I noticed, once I touched the 1:00 minute mark, that the “real Memory Palace” becomes nothing else but a “fictional” place. Because there is not enough time left to experience the place (if you go for 1:00 minutes and beyond), it is just something left inside you, that you know very well. I think you need the real place in the first place to be able to leave it and to experience it in a different way, that alienates it, but makes it something very special.

The major system is nothing different from that. The “rat” is something we can touch, but once it embodies the number 41 and becomes “unreal”, it can be so much more; a rat that flies or whatever your fantasy will let it be.

Regards,
Suzy

14

Hey Suzy!

Your posts are also a joy to read. You are definitely out of my league, both in speed cards and (specially) on your sheer capacity of imagination.

I re-read some of your older posts, both on this thread and elsewhere and your visualisation/imagination skills are awesome. I am not sure if I’d be able to “switch the atmosphere” of imaginary books to store any information long-term. It is really great that you are successful with this method.

I still wonder, though, what you could do with real memory palaces. What I mean is that, if you have such a skill with an imaginary book, I believe you must do a great job when using real MPs and using your spatial awareness in its full potential (I still don’t think you are using it 100% when applying your method, which seems more like a peg method). I guess your sub-1 min mark for speed cards attests that (you are using a real MP for that, aren’t you?).

The way you describe how real MPs “become” as if fictional, “just something left inside you, that you know very well”, is very nice. I guess I am beginning to relate to that, but more about my images than about the memory palaces per se. I am still trying to reach the 3 min mark for speed cards, so maybe that’s why the MP (I used only one until yesterday, when I finally created another one!) hasn’t been completely “alienated” yet. However, my images seem to have shrunk into its most important characteristics only, like a mental filter that removes the “noise” common to all of them and leaves only their most prominent aspect, which can be visual, but also emotional. Impressive what the mind can do…

I finish this post by quoting you again:

I truly believe in that and I’ll probably be repeating this sentence many times during my journey into the Art of Memory. I just hope to attain such skill one day.

Best!
Tammish.

15

Great to see you back again,

to make my argument about imaginary MPs comprehensible let me relate to memorizing cards.

Yes, I used real places for storing the information. I thought about 10 routes, each with 52 items I know well. Then I bought a lot of cards and began to try it out. It worked. The first attempt surprised me, I needed 5 min and did no mistakes. At this time I had to concentrate on the route, which I then recently came up with and I sometimes struggled with the meanings of the cards, which I then too recently came up with. This was like learning a new language.

Very quickly, within a few days I continued to think about the cards and the routes more often and became very comfortable with them. Bored in school classes I went through the information again and again and again.

Without much effort I reached the 3 min mark just as you did. I went further and studied 2 decks at a time. It worked.
But not continuous work with the actual cards made me better, no. Only the continuous thinking about the abstract information made me better. And please note, that at this time the subject of memorizing cards or artificial knowledge at speed were new to me.

I tried again later and became much stronger. Then I tried something special:
Took 10 decks of mine and memorized each subsequently. I recalled each one and laid it back again, its back facing me. After the initial memorization and recalling process I went over them again, because I was curious if I could recall any of it. Surprisingly I had really no trouble doing this and I was even better in this second attempt trying to recall everything in its right order.
Some time later 1 deck took 1:20 and then finally very close to 1:00.
It is crucial to understand that I actually trained very little with actual cards. I became better while thinking about my routes and the cards. Finally the whole experience of memorizing cards changed. Cards and routes became second nature to me. And I am sure you will understand this.
The “ping-pong table” became after some time a special condition. It changed from “the table” to an broken old table upon which time left its marks. The actual table became an artificial table.

Therefore, the initial actual item, that served as a loci became something else, an idea. It became an feeling, something that has a story. When I memorize cards or arbitrary numbers they become part of the story. And that is my point. I never again looked through the route again, as it was initially created. It became something very different over time which I now experience in a very different way.

And thats what I understand under an MP changed or created by imagination. Imagination makes everything different. Because initially I simply recalled a foreign language and later this foreign language became a real collection of circumstances, created by imagination. And it was never an attempt of mine to reach 1 min. I wanted to reach an ambitious goal, to memorize things I never could have memorized before, just as I did with Pi.

And today, sometimes without having to think about a “loci” ideas come right into my mind I wouldn’t expect there to be. All that is artificial then is canalized into an anchor of opportunity for memorization.

The Major-System became a tool for me to see the world with different eyes.

But it is very important for me to articulate this point: This way of memorizing things is nothing special, everybody is capable of doing it. All the talk about genius and being very intelligent just is an excuse to never get started with anything. Because if somebody is born with a gift and I am not, then therefore I should never start and learn by myself.
We should never do this and follow our inner believes.
I don’t think much of the idea of the “best” way to memorize and the “fastest” way to learn abstract things. It should all be about enriching yourself and your personality.

I hope the idea of MPs created by imagination and why they are the pinnacle of the art of memorization became a little less difficult to understand. We will always need the actual world, because it provides necessary impulses for the mind. But once you close your eyes and just let your thoughts flow, you will be aware that there is a world inside you, that can create these special ideas. I often think about an artificial MP where everything can be stored. Like your personal library.

Thanks for reading and continuing to think about the subject,
Suzy.

16

Hey Suzy!

For many days, I’ve tried to find an inspiration as to how to reply to you – I can’t. But, because I have replied to other threads, I feel the need to reply to you anyway. So I write you this awkward answer…

I read your words in awe. I promise that when I can really understand you, I will write back.

In the meantime, keep doing what you are doing. I don’t have to be a genius to realise you are doing something right.

All my best,
Tammish.