New POA formation

Hi, I am starting to create a PAO system. Have found that trying to create memory images without a location is tricky since spatial memory is so effective. Hence memory palaces very useful.
Has anyone created a POA system with a location implicit in the image? Your thoughts are appreciated…

1 Like

Yes, I had recently and I know that regular memories are very reliable and they are 93% accurate even 3 months later :slightly_smiling_face:

And I have thought of creating a PAO in which I think of a regular cartoon character for a two digit number,

And then I think of a number shape for the next two digit number,Make it’s edges roundy(you can have freedom with this to make your object very memorable and combine it with a regular cartoon character’s face,You can reduce the accuracy of your memory for the position of the objects but you those object may only be a few distance away that is managble by you,

And false memories are stronger than true memories(in this case you are trading the accuracy and speed of your spaitial memory for a huge increase in storage capacity but only when doing this),

Even with that loss in speed this method is faster than rote memorisation,

Without a highly accurate spiral memory my accuracy was 98.5% for visual memory of images which I had seen about 17 hours ago and I still remember everything! even my mistakes because of this method and when I encoded the images of object which I saw in that place into a created object as done in the Memory Palace technique the visual memory accuracy of mine went to 100% but only when I gave about 6 seconds per image,was not distracted and paid attention!,

And I saw exact images and even recalled the windows that were hidden behind my curtains when trying to recall the images of my room with this method along with its objects with slightly inaccurate positions because they were scattered,

Important- When learning images,numbers etc… with this method it is important to encode the images with 100% accuracy which should not be too hard as we do it all the time except the time when we are unconscious during our sleep and are not dreaming which is a hypothesis of my,

You can also create a parallel memory palace in your imagination and reserve one side with 100% visual image accuracy and another side with 100% spiaital memory accuracy and with this you will be able to recall images correctly 100% of the time and in most cases their positions will also be 100% accurate which happened to me,

A proverb that was made for this post - The things which you do not encode correctly you also don’t recall correctly.

Credits
And credit to @Erol and @Nagime for creating the Shaper System and Parallel Memory Palaces respectively,

And,

Cheers.

1 Like

One copy is visual and one is spatial? I don’t think I understand what exactly is being explained here with the parallel memory palace you mentioned. What’s the difference exactly, and how does it work? Is this something you do as an exercise?

1 Like

One part of the Parallel Memory Palace contains images with 100% accuracy but they can have positions slightly different from their original positions if it makes their positions easier to remember (For ex-An ordinary pencil becoming a pencil having a statue of a plastic joker on it whose position is laid on a table which is an object in my memory palace and it is kept on a table because of personal preference) and the other part of that parallel memory palace can have have positions of those objects which are 100% accurate but the images need not be 100% accurate but the type of that image must be the same(ex-An odinary :pencil2: (object) over a table in a slanted position ,Example explanation Sentence-“This is a new type of pencil”.)
Or “it’s a new type of bag”,If one object that you have created in your memory palace for storing or representing information is a bag,

Credit to @RonaldJohnson for one sentence which he wrote and I have written a sentence that is similar in the above sentence about representation because it is so helpful and effective and I want to help and credit to @Nagime again for creating Parallel Memory Palaces

I am free today for answering any question but I may be busy due to personal obligations for a long te so feel free to ask me any questions about your methods and any problems in memory as they are asked by others I will do my best to help you in my limited time and I have written somethings about object types in my post below you can visit this if you are interested

And,

Have a Nice Day.

This method is something that I am experimenting with currently and I do not use it as an exercise as I know very little on how to create brain exercises that work(I am learning about that) and do you know that most brain exercises do not work,

I will need to ask @Nagime how this technique works as I am learning by science and experience how to find how memory techniques work in the brain but currently it may be beyond my ability,

I hope finally learn one day how to find out how a memory technique work,
Can you post @Nagime how you find out how memory techniques work as this will help a lot of people and I will become gradually or immediate self dependent on finding out how memory techniques work

Which will help me in making memory techniques as I will know how my collection of Memory techniques work,

Some of which I have not posted in this forum because they were hard to describe or inefficient,

And,

Have a Grand Day everybody of the Art of Memory Forum :slightly_smiling_face:

.

There really is an endless amount of things I can say, but I will keep it extremely short.

I primarily rely on two general things to determine or find methods that work.

These are : reasoning and information.

Information amounts to data from tests, scientific information, abstract or mathematical information and some more concrete information.

Information supplements reasoning, with adequate reasoning capability even with limited information you can find out almost anything.


The way I ensure memory techniques work, is by first reasoning on how I reason in the first place. Subsequently, I do this to ensure that my reasoning is going to retain sufficient accuracy and efficiency for use.

With that complete, I move on to constructing theory on how memory functions. I ensure this theory is sufficient enough to explain everything, which usually amounts to basic reasoning, an extreme care of detail, reference to scientific or mathematical information and experimentation.

I then verify my theory by testing it’s implications. If it does not work or only sometimes works, my theory is wrong, so I need to adjust or construct a new one.

I then continue to verify it and abuse its implications or go onto some other theory for a different purpose, usually this is when my theory seems complete or something is more urgent currently (perhaps because it is required to further this theory).

~repeat.

Therefore, my methods are based on particular implications and possibilities within theory that I then verify. If the method is not mine, it would accordingly have correct functionality within my own theory of how memory works, unless my theory is wrong. If a theory is not mine it would subsequently have correct consistency with a theory of my own, unless it is wrong or mine is wrong.

Through any of these stages, I often go back to particular stages, such as refining how I reason if I believe there are implications for more efficient reasoning or some stroke of creativity has hit me. I keep my reasoning, logical enough, so that my conclusions are never wrong, given my arguments are correct. Conversely, I often find out that a lot of established scientific theory (usually proposed models and recent research) is wrong, because I have contradictory evidence from other information or testing or reasoning and there is a valid explanation within my own system for how their current test results could have caused a misconception. It often then turns out in a few years of time that I indeed was right.

Which is another point to consider, theory tends to enhance testing creativity. For example, the theory regarding brain training is what determines the kind of training you are supposed to do. It is easy to say ‘I have tried everything’ however, by a simple change in theory, the actual thing you are doing can completely become an unexpected and never before considered thing. Conversely, most people often are not aware of the theory, therefore, how they do something can differ from the instructions provided. The brain is a fine organ, such differences can completely jeopardize any benefits.

A simple example to consider is dual-n-back, prior to the scientific research creating dual-n-back, has anyone of the other 7 billion people(perhaps quite a bit less at the time) on the planet actually attempted the same ‘dual-n-back’ procedure without any theory? The answer is most likely no. That should sink in a bit, because 7 billion people for many years have never done something that most people can do now. This is simply a comment to the ‘it must have been done before’ because sometimes it really has not.



Some of these comments are not quite an answer to the question, but overall this is how I do it.
Often for particular explanations, I cannot provide an answer that is too detailed from my context as it would not be understood easily, so I also try to use common terminology or otherwise principles to explain why.