I Get it Wrong: Energy and Manifesting

by Mike Sententia on January 9, 2013

You found my old blog. Thanks for visiting! For my new writing, visit mikesententia.com.

Last post, I said:

In my experience, raising lots of energy does not result in more effective magick.

It was a throwaway line, something obvious to me. But Ananael replied:

Do you see any difference at all in your two probability data sets between raising energy and not doing so with similar rites? I ask because the tests I’ve done seem to go against what you’re saying, though the degree of increased probability shift doesn’t always necessarily follow increased energy along a strictly linear progression.

No, I must admit, I had not tested this. Well, I’ve tested it with energy healing, where the key is the energy’s signature, not the quantity. But Ananael mostly works with probability and luck — what I call “manifesting” — and I hadn’t tried that with more energy.

It’s embarrassing being out-scienced on my own blog.

The reason I hadn’t tested this is simple: Manifesting works by sending instructions to ethereal software, which handles the details. (That’s my model, anyway — Ananael has a different model, but this post isn’t the place to get into that.) So, there are only three things that should matter for manifesting:

  • The ethereal software you’re using — is it programmed well?
  • Does the software recognize you as an authorized user?
  • Can you clearly communicate your intent, and if applicable, receive replies from the software?

Where does energy fit into that? I didn’t see any obvious spot, and mostly dismissed the notion. But the first rule of science is, “If you want to know the answer, run the experiment.” Really, that’s the only rule of science. So I tested it.

There’s no way more energy could affect the ethereal software itself, and probably no way more energy would affect your authorization with the software. (Matching the software’s signature is important, but more energy in your own signature shouldn’t be.)

But what about the communication itself? After all, that’s been the hardest part of manifesting for me, and it’s the hardest part for Lisa and other psychics and mages I work with, too. And I could imagine more energy somehow boosting the communication somehow, making it easier for the ethereal software to read, giving you more accurate results.

So I tried it. I engaged the mental muscles I use for energy healing and working with energy, used them to build energy (particularly in my head), and prepared a message: “Tell me about my day tomorrow.” That’s the kind of thing I normally do with manifesting, just asking for information, and if the communication were clearer, I’d be able to spot it just from reading the reply.

Turns out, I didn’t even have to wait for the reply. It was faster and easier to gather the signatures of my own thoughts and turn them into a message. And I cursed in my notes for the first time in months, writing, “Holy shit, it actually works. More energy makes your thoughts easier to package [for communication].”

I kept the energy going while reading the software’s reply, and found that having a lot of energy was distracting and made it harder to read (no surprise there), but that having a very steady but still higher-than-normal level of energy made the reply much clearer (which was surprising). This is a big deal — reading the reply is the hardest part of manifesting for me.

And then, I tried sending another message with the same steady but somewhat-elevated energy I used for receiving, and it was even smoother and easier than the previous high-but-unsteady-energy version. And I tried a few other variations on communication, adding this steady elevated energy to them, and they all worked better.

So, I’m quite excited now, because (1) I’m a bit closer to cracking a hard problem, and (2) I learned something from you, my readers, which makes all this blogging worth it.

And to Ananael: Thanks for replying, and for keeping me honest.

If you liked this post, consider visiting my current blog at mikesententia.com.

{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }

Ananael Qaa January 10, 2013 at 7:29 AM

I don’t know if you read it back when I originally posted it, but you may want to take a look (or another look) at this:


That article came out of a rather heated discussion over the various models of magick as my attempt to relate energy work to Patrick Dunn’s information model. As far as I can tell your model is an information-type one, though you propose more complex information structures (ethereal software) than Patrick does. Still, as I see it signal strength is going to be relevant whether or not those structures are present and my experiences support that hypothesis.

For reference, Patrick’s model works like this:

[Magician’s Information Field] — Transmission —> [Target Information Field]

Yours is more like this:

[Magician’s Information Field] — Transmission —> [Ethereal Software] — Transmission —> [Target Information Field]

So the two models are pretty similar. I would think Patrick’s model would be very similar to your “direct” model that does not employ ethereal software. If you haven’t read it, you might want to check out his Postmodern Magick in which he outlines out the full form of his information model. You might find some more ideas there that you can incorporate into your own.


Mike Sententia January 11, 2013 at 5:04 PM

Thanks. I read that post a while back, and enjoyed it. I think it’s a nice way to wed the energy and information models. I’ve never been big on either of those models, but maybe I would enjoy Patrick’s book — I enjoy his other writings.


Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: