Slashdot Mirror


USAF Studies Teleportation

ArchAngel21x writes "Star Trek fans may be happy to hear that the Air Force has paid to study psychic teleportation. But scientists aren't so thrilled. The Air Force Research Lab's August 'Teleportation Physics Report', posted earlier this week on the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) Web site, struck a raw nerve with physicists and critics of wasteful military spending."

678 comments

  1. For the love of..... by BWJones · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Initially I thought this may have some relevance to encryption as there is a phenomenon of quantum teleportation that appears to have some scientific validity and would have significance in military and strategic planning and communication. However, when I actually started reading the article, at first I could not stop laughing until I reached this part:

    From the linked .pdf :An experimental program similar in fashion to the Remote Viewing program should be funded at $900,000 - 1,000,000 per year in parallel with a theoretical program funded at $500,000 per year for an initial five-year duration.

    What!!!!!???? I am thunderstruck that this recommendation could be made. 1.5 Million dollars for essentially a program that the CIA back in the 1970's decided was full of crap and decided to abandon. By the way, the CIA's program was ill conceived and full of it back then too amounting to a huge waste of taxpayer dollars.

    Other conclusions in the document are: "We will need a physics theory of consciousness and psychotronics, along with more experimental data, in order to test the hypothesis in Section 5.1.1 and discover the physical mechanisms that lay behind the psychotronic manipulation of matter." What can I say? The status of basic science education among those who make funding decisions within certain areas of government are pitiful.

    Even worse is this statement: "This phenomenon could generate a dramatic revolution in technology, which would result from a dramatic paradigm shift in science. Anomalies are the key to all paradigm shifts! " which has got to be the work of someone with a marketing background and absolutely no self respect in the scientific community. A document like this would be laughed out of the NIH or any other respectable scientific funding agency, but the scary thing is funding like this has always been able to go forward under the guise of military funding in crisis situations where fear abounds. Combine that with no understanding of science and this is what you get. If any of my students came up with something like this, I think I would cry.

    Hey, if the Air Force wants out of the box thinkers, I can come up with all sorts of biomemetic and bioencryption stuff for 1.5 Million that would be based in scientific fact with reliable peer review science behind it.

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:For the love of..... by Raindance · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I agree with you that it's a terrible, terrible waste of money and Bad Science.

      However, the statement you lambasted,

      "This phenomenon could generate a dramatic revolution in technology, which would result from a dramatic paradigm shift in science. Anomalies are the key to all paradigm shifts"

      is quite true, if a bit sensationalistic. I'm not certain, as you said, it shows "no understanding of science". It's a reasonable paraphrase of some of the assertions in Thomas Kuhn's 'The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" which is the backbone (along with Popper's ideas and some french folks' theories) of modern conceptions of science and how science changes.

      Sometime somewhere someone really made a big mistake, and thus this research program was born. However crap it may be, though, it does show awareness of modern approaches to scientific change.

      RD

    2. Re:For the love of..... by dbIII · · Score: 1
      "This phenomenon could generate a dramatic revolution in technology, which would result from a dramatic paradigm shift in science. Anomalies are the key to all paradigm shifts! "
      Hey buddy, can you paradigm?

      Now why is the USA going down the road to Lysenkoism? This was sort of crackpot science run under Stalin. There's an article on this shift in the USA at http://www.cosmos-club.org/journals/1995/seitz.htm l

    3. Re:For the love of..... by BWJones · · Score: 4, Interesting

      My criticism has more to do with the style of writing which borrows commonly used "catch words" that seem to be popular with marketing folks these days. Specifically I was referring to his use of "paradigm shifts" twice within two serial sentences. I am surprised we did not see the invocation of "world class" among other gems of marketspeak which I am loathe to include in this post.

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    4. Re:For the love of..... by Raindance · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Understood and agreed. I've found that bringing discussion of "paradigm shifts" into research is usually just used as a distraction to shift attention away from bad research.

      RD

    5. Re:For the love of..... by Rorschach1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You shouldn't take a report like this as evidence that the Air Force believes in psychic phenomena. They dole out quite a bit of money for various studies, and the people getting the money and doing the studies sometimes aren't the right people. The company I used to work for did a lot of papers for the Air Force and other agencies, and often I got the impression that it was material we had very little background in.

      It really came down to the company being a lot better at selling itself to these agencies than actually doing worthwhile research.

    6. Re:For the love of..... by Rei · · Score: 3, Funny

      Nonono. We need to keep giving the military more money. They always put it to good uses. They'd never, say, misplace 1 trillion dollars. More money for the military is the solution to everything.

      Even sarcasm. :)

      --
      "Now we're getting to Science -- I love this!" -- Dr. Steven Chu, Energy Secretary confirmation hearings.
    7. Re:For the love of..... by Fnkmaster · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Just to be clear - they funded a study into the general areas and applications of teleportation by a private individual/small company. Some of the conclusions seem a bit wacky, however, there is no evidence in this documentation that the recommendations are accepted or that this guy's conclusions are accepted.

      I don't think there's anything fundamentally wrong with paying somebody to do some background research on potentially "out there" research areas, and figure out what application they might have to the military. However, with rather complicated topics like this, they should be hiring people with appropriate qualifications, and relying on a review of the research by qualified scientists before they do anything else with it. I assume they would do that before pouring millions a year into some of this stuff.

      The point where I start becoming wary is the point where he starts saying things like this:

      The debate among scientists and scientific philosophers is highly charged at times, and becomes acrimonious to the point where reputable skeptical scientists cease being impartial by refusing to examine the experimental data or theories, and they prefer to bypass rational discourse by engaging in ad hominem attacks and irrational "armchair" arguments.

      I don't know the specifics of the Chinese studies he mentions, but I know that most of the psychokinetic stuff from the 70s has been thoroughly discredited when repeated under controlled conditions. If you can only bend a spoon with your mind when its your spoon and your on national TV, then I don't think you're really bending the spoon with your mind. Incredible claims require incredibly strong evidence to back them up. If this guy can repeat any of the results that the Chinese studies he mentions were able to produce (he says they were repeatable, but fail to say by whom - if they just said they were repeatable, that fails to rule out the most likely explanation of simple scientific fraud), then by all means, fund away.

      It is a bit disturbing is that this same fellow is making recommendations on military funding of mainstream scientific propositions, like quantum cryptography and computation, entanglement research, and thereotical string theory stuff. And he thinks they should wait-and-see while D-Brane theory matures, but run full steam ahead with psychokinetic research.

      He also seems to recommend that some of the most outrageous and least likely to pay off topics should be pursued the most vigorously, like "biological quantum teleportation", based on a single, unpublished paper in the arxiv.org online repository (i.e. a non-peer reviewed scientific publication with no credibility to speak of). Additionally, he recommends funding FTL communication based on entanglement, demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of the concept of group vs. phase velocity. Without at least an inkling of which direction to go, funding a million bucks a year of FTL communications research based on the irrelevant mechanism behind entanglement is useless.

      So yes, this guy is a quack, but it looks like nobody is taking the recommendations seriously. Was the study a waste of $25,000 (what the Yahoo News article says the company was paid for this work)? Perhaps, but lots of small research projects happen and end up going nowhere, and like they say, it's sometimes worth pursuing a bit of cursory research in even unlikely areas to see if anything interesting gets turned up. In this case, it didn't pay off (and I doubt this guy will be doing any more studies for the Air Force).

    8. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
      American lysenkoism, such as it is, is the result of giving money to the people who promise the most. It's a collective problem, without any one identifiable person driving the drivel.

      I saw this in the telecom industry. Our company had a mania for the "make or buy" decision. That meant, in practice, that the money went to the group that made the biggest promises. Consequently, everyone promised more than they could actually accomplish. Managers knew that, of course, but they went along because they were subject to the same pressures. You could see, year after year, more hyperbole and overstatement creeping into goal statements, mission statements, and everything. It becomes an erosion of honesty, and (like in lysenkoism), one can imagine drifting off into a fantasy world.

      In industry, of course, the free market will eventually stop such corporate fantasies. If only because people stop buying the resulting products and the company flounders.

      Another example of such over-promising is the Institute for Soldier Nanotechnology. Mind you, the ISN is a bunch of competent people doing real research, and I expect them to do great things. Still, they cannot resist making wild promises on their web site, http://web.mit.edu/isn/aboutisn/index.html.

      "Imagine a bullet-proof jumpsuit, no thicker than ordinary spandex, that monitors health, eases injuries, communicates automatically, and maybe even lends superhuman abilities."

      Uh huh. Lemme see. How much force needs to be applied to stop a bullet in the thickness of spandex? Quite a bit. If you do a minor calculation, you'll find it's completely ridiculous, yet these guys with physics Ph.D.s tolerate this kind of crap as advertisement.

      They tolerate it because if they don't, someone else will say it, and that someone will get the money. The Army guys play along. That way, they can presumably point out to congressmen the wonderful things they will get from their research money.

      Personally, I think that the root of the problem is that no one is really paid to evaluate these research proposals. It's expected to be done in one's spare time.

    9. Re:For the love of..... by mi · · Score: 2, Informative
      Now why is the USA going down the road to Lysenkoism?

      The really bad part about Lysenkoism was the guy's ability to send representatives of competing scientific ideas to GULAG -- through the universal accusations of treason.

      As long as that ability is nowhere to be seen around here (and it is not), bringing up the scumbag's name is no better than mentioning Nazis :-)

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    10. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well... it's not best-of-breed or low hanging fruit.

    11. Re:For the love of..... by Zondar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It is only when you expand your beliefs of what is "possible" beyond the limits of your 'basic science education' that real discoveries are possible. Lots of people in history have been laughed out of town that turned out to make significant scientific discoveries.

      I mean, *everone* knows the Earth is the center of the universe... /rolleyes (That darned Copernicus)

      And as for those "invisible streams of particles" - *I* don't see any particles, and I don't feel them either! Everyone knows you're making it up!! (Radioactivity? Marie Curie, anyone?)

      Tiny little dimensions curled up so small that even particle accelerators can't see them? Science fiction (oh yeah, that's called String Theory, isn't it?)

      And...

      And...

      Remote Viewing sounds a lot like the work of Edgar Cayce - whose actions still mystify people today. Being able to go into a "trance" and deliver accurate medical diagnoses of people whom he had never touched, only had the address and a rough physical description... even to the point of breaking off the diagnosis session when the person died ACROSS THE ATLANTIC OCEAN...

      Whether it's real or not, I'm not sure anyone really knows or can prove one way or another yet. However, there have always been theories on a 'collective unconscious' or something similar - something like a giant radio channel on which the thoughts and actions of everyone everywhere is available.

      Don't laugh at the 'unbelievable' too hard. It might be next year's Science Today.

    12. Re:For the love of..... by kfg · · Score: 1

      "This phenomenon. . ."

      What phenomenon?

      KFG

    13. Re:For the love of..... by BWJones · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Some of the conclusions seem a bit wacky, however, there is no evidence in this documentation that the recommendations are accepted or that this guy's conclusions are accepted.

      But this is an advocation for 8 Million dollars of taxpayer funded money. A lot of good science can be done with 8 Million dollars.

      don't think there's anything fundamentally wrong with paying somebody to do some background research on potentially "out there" research areas, and figure out what application they might have to the military.

      Is it worth 8 Million dollars? Do you know how much education could be done for 8 Million dollars? Do you know how much science could be done for 8 Million dollars? Hell, do you know how much 8 million dollars would be if compounded with interest over 20 years? That would certainly help pay down our deficit and make US science more competitive.

      I don't know the specifics of the Chinese studies he mentions, but I know that most of the psychokinetic stuff from the 70s has been thoroughly discredited when repeated under controlled conditions.

      If it is not testable, then by definition it is not science. This is why real science is peer reviewed and documented. If your peers cannot duplicate your results or have access to your data, then there very well may be some suspect work going on.

      It is a bit disturbing is that this same fellow is making recommendations on military funding of mainstream scientific propositions, like quantum cryptography and computation, entanglement research, and thereotical string theory stuff.

      What is disturbing is that this person is confabulating real science with bogus ideas. I call shenanigans! Seriously though, this is how lots of crackpots justify their products and ideas by making them sound plausible through the lens of real science. To the untrained, this could appear plausible. But like shark cartilage and crystal healing (placebo effects aside) much of this stuff is complete bunk.

      Was the study a waste of $25,000 (what the Yahoo News article says the company was paid for this work)?

      I'll field that question.........The answer is yes .

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    14. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No offence intended, but this is a post appropriate for someone with the Avatar name of Zondar.

      I am reminded of the following: You're stupid minds! Stupid I say!

      LOL.

    15. Re:For the love of..... by Zondar · · Score: 1

      Yep, especially since I've had this nick since 1989. I can't help what writers do with the same name in their books.

    16. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Remote Viewing sounds a lot like the work of Edgar Cayce - whose actions still mystify people today."

      If you're stupid, perhaps.

    17. Re:For the love of..... by Fnkmaster · · Score: 1

      But this is an advocation for 8 Million dollars of taxpayer funded money. A lot of good science can be done with 8 Million dollars.

      I know nobody reads the articles, but please look at the last sentence in the Yahoo News article. The Air Force implies they are not going to follow the recommendations or spend any more on this guy, the company he works for, or anything related to them. Read the articles, people, please!!! I *CERTAINLY* never said it was worth 8 million dollars of research, unless this guy was presenting repeatable, scientifically verifiable results of interest that some respected scientists validated as being worthy of further research (and he's not presenting anything of the sort here).

      If it is not testable, then by definition it is not science. This is why real science is peer reviewed and documented. If your peers cannot duplicate your results or have access to your data, then there very well may be some suspect work going on.

      See above. I agree. I am a physicist by training. You are preaching to the choir.

      What is disturbing is that this person is confabulating real science with bogus ideas.

      Agreed. There is enough real science in there to create an air of legitimacy to a really uninformed reader. That does give me cause for concern. I was sort of trying to think aloud before about how to address that - when it comes down to it, I think what I said before holds, real scientists in academic posts need to review these "research reports" before the military does anything with them.

      It does bug me somewhat that they pay 25 grand for a research report that looks like some kooky college exercise. If somebody wants to write an argument for funding this kind of stuff, let them do so on their own budget. The government would be better served putting a few grand into paying some academic scientists to spend a few hours or days reviewing the work and giving their assessment to help inform how valid the recommendations are, and whether they are justified by the summarized research contained therein. I'm sure in this case, the report would have been instantly torn to shreds.

    18. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of the scientists in the Air Force Research Lab feel your pain. Unfortunately, some of the Lab's senior leadership (happily not all) think they know more than the scientist. Also recognize that the absolutely incredible weapons systems that give the US its superiority on the battlefield are also developed in these labs.

    19. Re:For the love of..... by killjoe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I just want to pick a nit with you. You said.

      ' Incredible claims require incredibly strong evidence to back them up.'

      This is a ridiculus statement to make. All claims should be judged by the same criterea. Just because you think the claim is ridiculus you should not be able to raise the bar for proof beyond any other claim. Science is science, proof is proof. You don't get to say "this proof is not sufficient because your claim is incredible".

      --
      evil is as evil does
    20. Re:For the love of..... by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      You really don't think those programs actually existed do you?

    21. Re:For the love of..... by pilgrim23 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Folks. this is how it works: It is 90 days till the end of the budget cycle. You have $2-3 million left over, If you do NOT have a documented use for that money come Appropriation Day then your budget will be docked by this amount. Budget and the size of your department are all that matter in government land. It matters not one jot what this is spent on, it MUST be spent and it must be spent in a document able way. If the idea is hair brained, stupid, and a waste it may or may not be dredged out of the cesspool of bureaucracy and scrutinized on Slash dot or other forums (like the Congress), but in most cases it just makes another month's pay for a Beltway Bandit "Think Tank" or "Institute". Face it folks: Taxes are never levied for the benefit of those taxed, and the money gained is never spent in a worthwhile way.

      --
      - Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
    22. Re:For the love of..... by winwar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, because we are nitpicking...

      When exactly does science "prove" something?

      How does science or the scientific method "prove" something?

      It doesn't.

      It gathers evidence to support hypotheses, which then may become theories, laws and paradigms. But it hasn't "proven" anything. It provides the most likely explanation, at best.

      And I think it is reasonable to expect that incredible claims have incredibly strong evidence to back them up. Otherwise, they are unlikely to be accepted. If you claim teleportation is possible, you had better be able to do it, at least on a small scale, otherwise people will rightly think you are crackpot....

    23. Re:For the love of..... by ThePlague · · Score: 1, Funny

      Hey, it's all part of the "faith-based inititive". First it was money to religious organizations, then it was faith-based intelligence regarding Iraq, and now it's faith-based science.

      I'd be willing to bet there's federal grant money out there right now studying "Intelligent Design" as an alternative to evolution.

    24. Re:For the love of..... by antiMStroll · · Score: 2, Informative

      For the record, this is far from the first study of its type performed for the American military. There's a long history of this kind thing, especially through the seventies.

    25. Re:For the love of..... by Fnkmaster · · Score: 1

      That's not a very realistic attitude to take and you misunderstand my point. Are you saying that the standards for evidence for each and every claim should be identical, even if some of the claims have been proven and verified thousands of times in the past? I agree that proof is proof - if a hypothesis is falsifiable, and provides for a repeatable experiment, and it's proven to within a reasonable degree of confidence, then it's proven well enough for me.

      But that doesn't really answer the question of how do I deal with the large volume of stuff that people claim - given that I don't ahve the time to deal with each and every claim, and attempt to validate them all using the scientific method, I have to decide on some basic standards of evidence as well as standards for whose information I will trust without validation.

      If somebody claims that they built an anti-gravity device in my basement I would require a complete demonstration of the device, as well as a description of the theoretical framework behind it in order to accept the claim. If somebody claims that they built their own car from a kit, I will probably accept their claim as true barring evidence to the contrary since it doesn't contradict centuries of human knowledge and science.

      I think when quantum mechanics and general relativity came along they were absolutely subjected to this sort of incredulity, and appropriately so. Some of the claims seemed incredible, so the evidence was picked through by many scientists with fine toothed combs, and many years were spent trying to confirm results and devise additional experiments to test their limits. But in the end, they were accepted as true (or rather as accurate models of reality - however you want to phrase this from a philisophical perspective).

      Does this mean radical breakthroughs have to overcome inherent inertia? Yes. But it also puts a barrier up to keep the kooks and their crappy ideas out of the scientific mainstream. Generally, even when the source is kooky, if the idea has merit it ends up being accepted. If you can point to counterexamples where this has not occurred, then I'd love to hear them.

    26. Re:For the love of..... by Zangief · · Score: 1

      You are right, but...

      Which anomalies!!! There are no confirmed proofs of any psychic power, let alone psychic teleportation!

      Those guys made an awful decision, and should be teleported out of their jobs.

    27. Re:For the love of..... by Sammy76 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Right, and the roads I drive on, libraries I use, schools I attend, courts that uphold our laws and the military that defends us are all completely worthless and solely for the benefit of some politician and their corporate whores.

      I'm sure if we eleminated taxes and spent our windfall on more shit from Wal-Mart the invisible hand of capitalism would take care of all our problems for us.

    28. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...but not at US Government-scale spending.

      When the US launches a space shuttle at $500 million a pop, how does this really factor into anything at all?

      At least this is going into the "things we know we don't know" or "things we know are false" buckets.

      Before you get all steamed about this, ask your representatives just what their pork projects pull into your district, and for whom do they really benefit...

    29. Re:For the love of..... by Total_Wimp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Whether it's real or not, I'm not sure anyone really knows or can prove one way or another yet. However, there have always been theories on a 'collective unconscious' or something similar - something like a giant radio channel on which the thoughts and actions of everyone everywhere is available.

      A teenage friend of my daughter told me the other day about his desire to get free energy out of magnets. His theory was that since they're constantly pushing against each other, you can use that push to power a fan which would turn a wind turbine. He believed that the theory hadn't been adequately tested and he wanted to borrow some or the high-powered magnets I had gotten out of hard drives.

      Naturaly I gave him the magnets (never squash initiative in a teenager if you can possibly help it), but they came with discussion of putting in as much energy as you get out, potential energy in a gravity well, etc.

      He was a kid, the magnets were basically free. His "experiments" would cause no harm. I sat down and told him the truth before letting him proceed. If we're going to have this kind of relationship with full grown men, I'd prefer we did it with free magnets and an education program instead of 7.5 million bucks of our hard-earned tax dollars.

      TW

    30. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      String theory is a theoretical model that attempts to describe actual observed phenomena. It's currently not testable. All the other scientific models you mentioned are testable with experiment, and repeatable. Hell, you can test elementary quantum mechanics with a flashlight, a piece of cardboard, and a razor. Anyway, these models displaced other models that were either assertions without evidence, or merely inadequate models. So called "paranormal" phenomena make assertions without evidence. So I have one simple challenge for Edgar Cayce: prove it. I'm 5'11", 200 lbs, brown hair, blue eyes, fair skin. Diagnose me (saying I'm overweight doesn't count). Once you've passed that, I suggest heading over to www.randi.org and entering for the million dollar prize.

      But you already know it's bullshit, don't you? You've got a little voice of reason that knows it's bullshit, and you're suppressing it, aren't you? Or have I just been trolled?

      "They also laughed at Bozo the Clown" -- Sagan

    31. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ask a sheep farmer about this one.

      Take a known sheep that is adept at getting through fences. Take said sheep to a flock that is full of wool-brains. Soon enough, just about the whole flock knows how to get through the fence now. It's more than just observation and follow-the-leader.

      There are some collective things that happen with herd animals that, when observed, make you wonder a bit about what intelligence really is.

    32. Re:For the love of..... by FirstTimeCaller · · Score: 1

      Don't laugh at the 'unbelievable' too hard. It might be next year's Science Today.

      You'll excuse me if I take that risk and go ahead and laugh now. Actually, maybe I'll cry instead...

      Don't you think that if one single aspect of psychic phenomena was real, we would have seen evidence of it by now?

      People have been talking about this for years, and if any of it were true it would radically change the way we view the world. In effect it would turn everything we know about the universe upside down. But guess what? It hasn't. Life continues on. Crimes aren't solved by psychics (regardless of what TV may have us believe). No psychic has won the lottery or been kicked out of casinos. Missing persons have not been located by remote viewing. Sure some spoons get bent, but hey I can do that too (no telekenetic powers required I assure you).

      If you want to know how paranormal events have failed scientific investigations, do yourself a favor and check out the James Randi Foundation

      --
      Wanted: witty unique signature. Must be willing to relocate.
    33. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This phenomenon could generate a dramatic revolution in technology, which would result from a dramatic paradigm shift in science. Anomalies are the key to all paradigm shifts! "

      You're missing the point, Professor. Paradigm shift doesn't operate within the boundaries of normal science, such as peer review. Go re-read Kuhn.

    34. Re:For the love of..... by FurryFeet · · Score: 2, Funny

      Do you think they'll use Tiger Teams to coordinate synergies into digital convergence devices in order to create Best-of-Breed teleporters?
      (I have got to stop taliing to marketers. It's not healthy).

    35. Re:For the love of..... by fatphil · · Score: 1

      The same phenominon as remote viewing - namely the phenomenon of sucking US taxpayers money.

      Google for the following things for more info:
      Hal Puthoff, Russel Targ, Ingo Swann, Stanford Research Institute (SRI).

      Debunkings courtesy of Martin Gardner, and occasionally James Randi.

      In paper form "Science: good, bad, bogus" by Gardner.

      Look on the bright side - with the US dollar plummetting, eventually this wasted expenditure will have almost no value at all!

      FP.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    36. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It would take care of our problems by killing you fairly quickly.

    37. Re:For the love of..... by kfg · · Score: 1

      Debunkings courtesy of Martin Gardner, and occasionally James Randi.

      I have been familiar with the work of these two gentleman for decades.

      Hence my question.

      . . .the phenomenon of sucking US taxpayers money.

      Lot of that going around these days, but I at least like to feel like I'm getting a nifty airplane out of the deal, or something. It might be worth it just to watch the Blue Angels perform.

      I can see carnival acts for free.

      . . .eventually this wasted expenditure will have almost no value at all!

      What you expect it to increase in value?

      KFG

    38. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Makmak? Is that you?

    39. Re:For the love of..... by TheUglyAmerican · · Score: 2

      "Imagine a bullet-proof jumpsuit, no thicker than ordinary spandex, ..."

      Possible. All you need is a material that becomes rigid in a more or less linear fashion in response to acceleration. Such a material would be flexible for normal activities but the moment a bullet tries to penetrate it (a force attempting to accelerate the fabric at a rate faster than it can physically tolerate), it would become rigid and spread the force of the bullet over a wide area rendering it non-lethal.

      Of course I could be wrong.

      --
      "Written on the pages is the answer to the never ending story..."
    40. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      if the idea has merit it ends up being accepted. If you can point to counterexamples where this has not occurred, then I'd love to hear them.

      I think you ask the impossible. How can it be offered as an idea with merit if it's not accepted?

    41. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like someone forgot to take their extra dose of Synergy this morning.

    42. Re:For the love of..... by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      If it became *too* rigid it would shatter. Not rigid enough and it would stretch and probably not save the wearer from fatal injury.

      You would need something with the tensile strengh of titanium that could be woven like nylon. I'm not sure it's impossible (I've a hunch if you did the maths it would be though) but probably beyond modern technology.

    43. Re:For the love of..... by pipingguy · · Score: 4, Funny


      Krusty: So he's proactive, huh?

      Lady: Oh, God, yes. We're talking about a totally outrageous paradigm.

      Writer: Excuse me, but 'proactive' and 'paradigm'? Aren't these just buzzwords that dumb people use to sound important? Not that I'm accusing you of anything like that. .....[pause]..... I'm fired, aren't I?

      Myers: Oh, yes! - The rest of you writers start thinking up a name for this funky dog; I dunno, something along the line of say... Poochie, only more proactive.

    44. Re:For the love of..... by tcgroat · · Score: 1

      The steps are out of sequence. First you need the newly discovered anomaly, then you investigate it to see what it means and where it leads. You don't decide on a destination, then throw around truckloads of money hoping to discover a new physical law producing the results you demanded. Unlike human laws, natural laws don't change to suit the highest bidder.

    45. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      >I am thunderstruck that this recommendation could be made. 1.5 Million dollars for essentially a program that the CIA back in the 1970's decided was full of crap and decided to abandon


      Actually it was shut down for ideological (religous) reasons.

    46. Re:For the love of..... by Anubis350 · · Score: 1

      actually, while I dofnt have the link handy, there was an NYTimes article a while back about a substance that clothing could be soaked in allowing it to become rigid on contact. They were busy testing it and it seemed quite feasable

      --
      "goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
    47. Re:For the love of..... by rossifer · · Score: 1

      This is a ridiculus statement to make.

      His statement is the best way to evaluate new assertions. If you submit all assertions to the "proven aka 100% confidence" test, you believe nothing, because nothing can actually meet that level of confidence (except for personal existence, thanks to Descarte).

      Instead, we determine if new information should be brought into our internal knowledge database (I've heard this called our "schemata") through a process of consistency testing. What we're looking for is consistency with already accepted statements (whether lemmas or conclusions). If the new statement is consistent with what we already know, the new claim is usually accepted without muss or fuss. If the claim is inconsistent, however, more interesting things happen...

      We can overlook a few inconsistencies here and there (expecting them to be resolved with more information over time), but rational humans tend not to simultanously accept direct contradictions. Either the originally accepted statement or the new statement that contradicts it or both are in error. If a statement contradicts many accepted facts, a great deal of evidence will be needed to overturn all of those accepted facts and replace them with the new assertion.

      Doublethink is often mentioned as an exception at this point, but most examples of "doublethink" that actually happen are really based on a low confidence in the original statement and a willingness to replace one lie with another without too much objection (some call this intelligently choosing your battles).

      Getting back to your remark:

      You don't get to say "this proof is not sufficient because your claim is incredible".

      You are correct, that statement is nonsense, but it is your error that makes it nonsense, not his. To correct your paraphrase: you do get to say, "This evidence is not sufficient because your claim is incredible."

      Regards,
      Ross

    48. Re:For the love of..... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      It's not woven like nylon, it's either grown into a specific form through some delicate electrochemical process (short term), built with nanoscale assemblers which could conceivably be MEMS-built (medium-term - I don't think we're on the right scale quite yet) or built by a universal assembler, or a special-purpose assembler built by such a device (long (long long?) term).

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    49. Re:For the love of..... by azav · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes, hello. Catholic church? I need a priest who can exorcise Marketing Speak from a poor slashdotter.

      Yes, I'll hold.

      --
      - Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
    50. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Other conclusions in the document are: "We will need a physics theory of consciousness and psychotronics, along with more experimental data, in order to test the hypothesis in Section 5.1.1 and discover the physical mechanisms that lay behind the psychotronic manipulation of matter."

      So I wonder what they are really doing? Black projects have to be called something in the accounting ledgers. You know how nit-picky accountants are. We may find out in ten years, or never. Nothing new here.

      (Speaking as a veteran of a "maritime survey mission" or two.)

    51. Re:For the love of..... by tsm_sf · · Score: 1

      In industry, of course, the free market will eventually stop such corporate fantasies

      Every time i hear the term 'free market' I see someone who inherited their money. There is no free market, and you should stop hoping it's going to come in and save the day for you.

      --
      Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
    52. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since you libertarian types are always linking to lists of logical fallacies, and since I'm too lazy to go look through one myself, let me ask... Is there a fancy Latin name for inferring pervasiveness from mere existence? As in, "I can think of examples of government waste, therefore all government spending is wasteful."

    53. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I recently visited a bookstore catering to field grade officers on an Army base. Among Black Hawk Down, Art of War, Saxe's Reveries, and other texts appealing to commanders, were numerous copies of Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Kuhn. So I am not so sure these guys are reading the words "paradigm shift" in marketdroid literature.

    54. Re:For the love of..... by JudgeFurious · · Score: 1

      So very, very true. I work in government (local level so we waste plenty of money but nowhere near the amount that the Fed is capable of) and it's the same thing every single year.

      Fiscal year ends, management people start looking at what's left of their budget, and then realize that they're going to lose "x" amount next year if they don't use it on something. Madcap antics ensue most of the time. Every once in a while though they actually come down and ask us what we need that we didn't get this year. That happened two years ago and I got some new servers which was nice.

      It's every year though. You could set your watch by it.

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
    55. Re:For the love of..... by Kaboom13 · · Score: 1

      While I agree with you this is wasted spending, 8 million is approx. 0.0001% of the current national debt. We could also save this much money by shutting down a few of the hundreds of military owned golf courses, for example, one of 3 in the Washington D.C. area. Or stop providing military planes (at a cost many times civilian air travel) for congressmen to go on tax-payer funded vacations around the world. The sad state of the U.S. Government is dropping 8 million on a crackpot theory is like you dropping a penny on the street and not bothering to pick it up.

    56. Re:For the love of..... by JudgeFurious · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You really don't have a clue about this do you? Sure the roads you drive on, libraries you use, schools you attend, and courts that uphold our laws as well as the military that defend us all get taken care of and they're each and every one a worthy reason to pay your taxes. But if you think the end of the year "Find something to do with this money quick!" effect doesn't happen then you're wrong.

      It's the result of the culture of government. Work in it and you'll see it in person. I can only speak to local government and a little bit to state level but I think it would be shocking if the same things didn't happen on the Fed level.

      From the start of the fiscal year management guards their funds like the money is coming out of their own checking account. At the start of our fiscal year you can't order a pack of friggin CDR's without three signatures. The department managers all turned in budgets that were approved and that included these expenses. They've been approved once before you even ask for them. But when the time comes to buy them it's an ordeal. They're like this over most anything you can imagine needing and big items like Servers involve piles of paper justifying their purchase. "It's the taxpayers money" is the phrase of the day. Then a funny thing happens near the end of the fiscal year. All these money hoarding managers start to figure out that they've still got money available that's "use or lose". See, all of them padded the shit out of their budgets when they turned them in for approval and they haven't used 3/4 of the total yet.

      Suddenly you can get anything that you can think of for about a month. It's a spending frenzy and some of the stupidest shit you can think of gets bought. Some good gets done from time to time but usually it's spent on stuff we don't need to do things we're never going to do.

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
    57. Re:For the love of..... by Sammy76 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm a government employee, so I have more than a little bite of a clue. I was specifically refuting the previous poster's crazy conclusion:

      "Face it folks: Taxes are never levied for the benefit of those taxed, and the money gained is never spent in a worthwhile way."

      I think the problems you see in government are similar to those found in any industry: the disconnect between budgeting/accounting and real-worl operations creates strange purchasing cycles. The opposite end of the spectrum is not to bin any of the money to specific programs/offices, and instead let people spend it on whatever, whenever. Then you get another kind of waste and abuse, with the added problem that your officemate just spent your money for you.

      So its a catch-22, and we have an imperfect system that people know how to work to their advantage.

    58. Re:For the love of..... by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      perhaps

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    59. Re:For the love of..... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      It worked! I mentally teleported money from taxpayers into the golf fund of my buddies!

    60. Re:For the love of..... by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      That "perhaps" in my first reply was supposed to be struck out. Either I fudged the HTML, or slashdot filtered it. Sorry.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    61. Re:For the love of..... by AndyChrist · · Score: 1

      The CIA program was a load of crap, and "Suspect Zero" was a terrible movie, too.

    62. Re:For the love of..... by jcr · · Score: 1

      I mean, *everone* knows the Earth is the center of the universe...

      Well, any frame of reference is as good as any other, so the earth might as well be the center of the universe. Coordinate systems are necessarily arbitrary, and so are their origins.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    63. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The scientific process is the means by which an idea shows merit. If your idea truly has merit, then the subjective opinions of other scientists become irrelevant. But you do have deal with objective criticism of your idea (i.e., peer review). How you deal with it determines whether you're a scientist or a crackpot.

    64. Re:For the love of..... by FindFirstOne · · Score: 2, Insightful
      It's tempting to generalize when promoting fringe science. It's also tempting to generalize when debunking fringe science. Perhaps the most maligned of the fringe projects has been the SRI (not CIA) remote viewing study which has been referred to in this thread. People who take the time to read the reports of this study find two things: One, that the percentage of hits (remote views which conformed to the experiment's criteria for accuracy) was statistically significant; Two, that outside the controlled conditions of the lab, it was only possible to state the probability that an attempted view would or would not be a hit. Statistical significance is interesting science, but weapons require higher predictabilities, and no way was found within the time frame and parameters of the experiment to alter or affect the probabilities in any way. The outcome was "interesting" in the physics sense, but was fundamentally uncontrollable; and therefore, by the standards of the experiment, a failure.


      This is where it's our job not simply to lump everything together and call it crap. Something odd happened at SRI: A "wild" phenomenon, being studied on the basis of a "look under every stone" philosophy, seemed to prove out real -- that is, statistically significant -- but not significant enough, and intractable to attempts to improve the odds. It's useless as a weapon or as just about anything else, but barring repeating the experiment we must accept that something odd enough to be genuinely disturbing happened to the technically sophisticated science workers and technicians who formed SRI's in-house volunteer test group.


      This is just a plea to not throw out the baby with the bath. Because a far-out experiment fails doesn't mean that nothing was learned. We frequently learn more from our failures than from our successes. As Robert Heinlein said, if you don't bet, you can't win. Finding that remote viewing, though uncontrollable, may be accurate at rates slightly but consistently better than chance, suggests not necessarily funding more remote viewing experiments but looking more closely at basic physics for chinks where some tiny thing may have been misinterpreted for no other reason than "common sense". In other words, stay loose.

    65. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amost a great idea.

      But it could not work in practice because the bullet could be traveling at a speed much greater than the speed of sound (and thus signal propigation for the phase change to occur) in any normal material.

      So not only would you need a corn starch and water like phase change effect with pressure (play with some it's fun), you would also need the material to be very exotic like superconductor material.

    66. Re:For the love of..... by Tony-A · · Score: 1

      This is a ridiculus statement to make. All claims should be judged by the same criterea. Just because you think the claim is ridiculus you should not be able to raise the bar for proof beyond any other claim. Science is science, proof is proof. You don't get to say "this proof is not sufficient because your claim is incredible". [Emphasis added]

      Does your logic apply to your own statement?

    67. Re:For the love of..... by javaman235 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There is no free market, and you should stop hoping it's going to come in and save the day for you.

      Yep, the free market is just a fairy tale. Companies who fail to produce viable products go on forever.

      What are you talking about?

      --
      -The art of programming is the pursuit of absolute simplicity.
    68. Re:For the love of..... by dbIII · · Score: 2, Insightful
      through the universal accusations of treason.
      Treason is OK in this neck of the woods - they even gave Ollie North another decent job - but being "Unamerican" is a different story, as McCarthy showed.

      There is also more to Lysenkoism than sending people you don't like away - and it is better that we don't go down to path to the nations science being controlled by crackpots.

    69. Re:For the love of..... by dbIII · · Score: 3, Informative
      it would become rigid and spread the force of the bullet over a wide area rendering it non-lethal.
      Becoming rigid it would nicely allow the energy to propagate into your body - you want something that absorbs energy. You see this in car design with crumple zones, and with the shift in bike helmet design from the rigid shell helmets that survive a knock but transmit a lot of force, to soft foam helmets that break easily but not much force gets to your skull.

      Really stiff materials transmit waves very well, and really thin things transmit very little energy in the form of waves out along the thickness of the material - most goes right in. Real bullet proof vests are thick, made of materials that are not very strong (kevlar is a type of nylon) but are very light and absorb a lot of energy. Also think of window glass - very strong, very stiff, can't absorb much energy VS polycarbonate, the plastic known as bullet proof glass.

      All you need is a material that becomes rigid in a more or less linear fashion in response to acceleration
      Visco-elastic materials behave in a similar way, and most metals behave differently under very high strain rates - but you really need something to absorb energy, so the opposite would be better. Something that gets squishy and squirts everywhere is a whole lot of energy that doesn't get through. Thixotrophic mud (spelling will be wrong) gets sloppier when you stir it.

      Someone is bound to post back that kevlar really is strong - it is very strong for a polymer and it doesn't weigh much per unit volume, so people tend to confuse strength to weight ratios with strength. However, something an inch thick is going to be stronger made from low quality steel than kevlar. Stength is how much force a material can take for a given cross section - that's all it is.

      There are stronger polymers than kevlar, but you wouldn't want to use them in a bullet proof vest since they don't absorb much energy.

    70. Re:For the love of..... by dbIII · · Score: 1
      You would need something with the tensile strengh of titanium that could be woven like nylon
      Glass fibre and carbon fibre are both stronger than titanium and can be woven, but they can't do superhero costumes.
    71. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Monopolistic competition.

    72. Re:For the love of..... by dbIII · · Score: 1
      and becomes acrimonious to the point where reputable skeptical scientists cease being impartial by refusing to examine the experimental data or theories,
      This of course is also the argument used by Horvath (car that supposedly ran on water with no energy input but really had some hydrogen cylinders strapped under it) and various other con artists.
    73. Re:For the love of..... by dbIII · · Score: 1
      Folks. this is how it works: It is 90 days till the end of the budget cycle. You have $2-3 million left over, If you do NOT have a documented use for that money
      A con mans dream!
    74. Re:For the love of..... by RayBender · · Score: 1
      It's a reasonable paraphrase of some of the assertions in Thomas Kuhn's 'The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" which is the backbone (along with Popper's ideas and some french folks' theories) of modern conceptions of science and how science changes.

      I would argue that most physical scientists will disagree with much of what is claimed by "philosphers of science". Violently, or at least vehemently, in the case of the "French folks" you mentioned - see the Sokal affair.

      "This phenomenon could generate a dramatic revolution in technology, which would result from a dramatic paradigm shift in science. Anomalies are the key to all paradigm shifts"

      This illustrates a classic logic problem: though perhaps all advances come from "anomalies", not all anomalies imply advances. Or put another way, Einstein may have been thought a cook, but that does not imply that all cooks are Einsteins. (Of course, not even Einstein was thought to be a cook - his theory very quickly was accepted).

      --
      Human genome = 3 billion base pairs = 6 GBit. Windows + Office = 20 Gbit. Which is more impressive?
    75. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fascists and religious fundamentalists have always been obsessed with the paranormal. You elected one this week, live with it.

    76. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just don't put the teleportation research facility on Mars or any of its moons, mmkay?!

    77. Re:For the love of..... by phoenix321 · · Score: 1

      "If God wanted humans to fly, he'd given them wings." and no amount of research, money and stubbornness on our part will change that, right? ;)

    78. Re:For the love of..... by JustAnOtherCodeSerf · · Score: 1

      I've always found it funny... Here's your budget, now spend it... if you don't spend it ALL, we'll want the extra back and we won't give you as much next year. It's the same in the corperate world too. Then we wonder why money gets wasted.

      --
      -=sig=-
    79. Re:For the love of..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds either like a bill for a huge drug party, or badly laundered funds for some sort of black ops project. I'd suspect the latter since the government allready makes a profit when involved with drugs anyway.

    80. Re:For the love of..... by RichardX · · Score: 1

      It is perfectly reasonable to require extraordinary evidence for extraordinary claims. for example, if I say to you that I have a pet cat.. well, that's such an unremarkable claim you probably wouldn't even want any evidence.. or at most, perhaps a photo.

      If, on the other hand, I told you I have a pet unicorn or dragon.. well, that IS a pretty extraordinary claim, you'd probably want to see photos (and check they're not fakes), video, maybe make a visit to see it in real life, have a qualified vet look at it, and so on.

      --
      Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
    81. Re:For the love of..... by HalfFlat · · Score: 1

      To deny the existence of any psychic phenomena is also going too far.

      Have you never had a dream of a place that you later visited? Have you never known who was on the phone before you picked it up (without other evidence)? Have you never known in advance what someone was going to say before they said it, with insufficient context to be able to figure it out?

      Speaking personally, all these have happened to me, and more, and friends as well. And we are all involved in the sciences professionally one way or another.

      Such events won't satisfy James Randi's stringent tests. I'm not claiming the existence of any sort of even vaguely reliable psychic abilities. Yet subjectively, these things do happen from time to time, and they are not restricted to one or two 'special' people. They almost certainly is a perfectly consistent explanation for such events that does not require a radically different scientific paradigm. Nonetheless, having been burnt so badly by so many charlatans and bogus claims, the world of science on the whole these days has no interest in persuing such matters any further.

      There is evidence of psychic phenomena, but it that evidence consists of unrepeatable, sporadic events distributed amongst a great many people's subjective experiences. Such occurances are so common among people I have met, that I would be very surprised if you the reader had not ever had one yourself. But if such events constitute the only such evidence, then the confirmation of psychic phenomena remains outside the purview of scientific enquiry, being as it is subjective, inconsistent and non-repeatable.

    82. Re:For the love of..... by tsm_sf · · Score: 1

      This is like arguing with someone that keeps saying Communism works...in theory.

      Ok, if there is a truly free market, why are large companies shielded from market discipline? How do the bailouts we've seen over the past 30 years jibe with your viewpoint? Face facts: the government manipulates the economy, and does it badly.

      --
      Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
    83. Re:For the love of..... by tcgroat · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I wouldn't put it quite that way. I say that the reason humans can fly in airplanes is because we quit trying to do it with feather-covered ornithopters. If you fixate on the goal of a flying machine with flapping wings, you wouldn't come up with the airplane. In other words, you extend and apply the proven science, rather than hoping some miraculous new science appears to validate the conclusion you insist upon.

      Assuming the article wasn'r a work of satire, which it certainly could be!

    84. Re:For the love of..... by pilgrim23 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I do not work in government, do not want any of that stuff, and do not think such an atitude is crazy.
      As to your assertions: Roads? toll. Military? mercenaries. Cops? contractors. Anything government does the market can and has throughout history done better, more economically, and with less paperwork. The idea that only "The Gub' mint" can do it is a lie. Government worker is the greatest contradiction in terms since well one: virgin birth. though, the later is far more possible...

      --
      - Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
    85. Re:For the love of..... by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

      You know some of the "misplaced money" is going to shit they don't want the public to have an inkling about. There's so many black projects out there for all sorts of stupid crap.

    86. Re:For the love of..... by Phiil · · Score: 1

      Unless you're researching paradigm shifts themselves of course, which someone surely must be doing?

    87. Re:For the love of..... by julesh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Admittedly, in the unlikely event that they are right (yeah, right!), what would result would qualify, IMO, as a paradigm shift... it would mean that almost all of our physical theories about the way the universe works were fundamentally _wrong_. We'd have to abandon relativity and quantum theory as they would, for the first time since their development, be unable to explain observable and repeatable phenomena. This, I think qualifies as a "paradigm shift", just as the introduction of these two theories were the last two such shifts we have experienced.

    88. Re:For the love of..... by julesh · · Score: 1

      When exactly does science "prove" something?

      When mercury was seen to rotate at a different rate to what was previously expected, that proved that something about the way we understood gravitation and mechanics to work was wrong.

      When stars appeared closer to the sun during a solar eclipse than their normal positions indicated, that proved that a number of theories about how electromagnetic radiation behaved in the presence of gravity wrong (leaving Einstein's General Relativity as the only commonly-accepted working theory).

      Science frequently proves things wrong. It never proves anything right. You can interpret the claims of this report as "the way we understand the universe is wrong", so it is possible that some of it might be proven. Unlikely, perhaps.

    89. Re:For the love of..... by FirstTimeCaller · · Score: 1

      Of course I've experienced the sorts of "coincidences" that you describe. Because they are rare and unexpected, we remember them. We forget all the times we answer the phone and it's not the person we expected it to be.

      The mind is an incredible thing. It's able to pick up on subtle things that seem like there is not enough information for. But I think that all these events are best explained by subtle clues and coincidence rather than some yet unknown means of communication through the ether. The former allows me to keep my present view of the universe, while the later requires me to radically change it. Of course, if enough evidence is presented for the later, then I will be forced to change my views (eventually).

      --
      Wanted: witty unique signature. Must be willing to relocate.
    90. Re:For the love of..... by tabrnaker · · Score: 1

      um, we already know they're incorrect since we have two different systems. duh.

    91. Re:For the love of..... by tabrnaker · · Score: 1

      Your type of thinking is the reason why scam artists make such a good living.

    92. Re:For the love of..... by tabrnaker · · Score: 1

      right, because my telephone always has a little attitude when it's my boss calling. You ever think there's never been any scientific proof because some people don't want there to be any proof? How do you think most people would lead their lives if they knew that they weren't just a sac of water and bones? All the cogs would leave the machine. You have heard of quantum mechanics right(string theory is better, but qm is testable)? When the particles that make up everything can choose to go with the herd or do their own thing, anything is possible.

    93. Re:For the love of..... by tabrnaker · · Score: 1

      unless you believe in the big bang. That's the center of the universe, or at least was.

    94. Re:For the love of..... by RichardX · · Score: 1

      You're saying I'm gulliable because I require proof that fits the magnitiude of the claim being made? Would you care to elaborate on that, as I fail to see how that works exactly... your reply would rather better fit the grandparent's claim of equal proof being fit for any claim no matter how grand (i.e. a photo for proof of owning a unicorn being as acceptable as a photo for proof of owning a cat)

      --
      Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
    95. Re:For the love of..... by mi · · Score: 1
      Mentioning McCarty negatively is a sure way to whore some karma, but bringing up Lysenko only makes sense if someone is using police against her/his scientific opponents.

      Whether or not that person -- or his opponents -- are "crackpots" is irrelevant. At various stages of history various scientists were -- by consensus of their peers -- deemed "crackpots", but were later recognized as visionaries, etc.

      Since neither the researchers in the article, nor their opponents are calling for law enforcement to investigate the other side, mentioning of Lysenko remains a name-dropping red herring.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    96. Re:For the love of..... by OdieWan · · Score: 1

      I dunno -- I heard Einstein had a party trick where he made a tasty souffle that couldn't be embedded in a flat 3+1 spacetime. That makes him a pretty good cook in my book!

    97. Re:For the love of..... by dbIII · · Score: 1
      but bringing up Lysenko only makes sense if someone is using police against her/his scientific opponents.
      He was a crackpot and drove soviet science into the ground - that is the context and I made that very clear. Whatever emotional connections you bring in yourself are your own problem.
      deemed "crackpots", but were later recognized as visionaries, etc.
      True in a couple of cases, but it has become the cry of con artists.
      Since neither the researchers in the article, nor their opponents are calling for law enforcement ... name-dropping red herring
      The real world is complex - live with it and take your Godwins law crap or whatever simplification to annoy others instead.
    98. Re:For the love of..... by mi · · Score: 1
      He was a crackpot and drove soviet science into the ground

      His being a crackpot and his running down Soviet biology and agriculture (not the whole of Soviet science) are only remotely related things.

      A truly talented scientist could do the same easily having the oppression apparatus of the USSR at his disposal. Isaac Newton (as depicted by Stephenson, anyway) comes to mind.

      Hence my point -- bringing up "Lysenkoism" in a country, where scientists (neither crackpots nor real) can not send other scientists to jail, is a red-herring.

      And it is a disgrace to the memory of brilliant minds, who suffered from real Lysenko.

      take your Godwins law crap or whatever simplification to annoy others instead.

      Sorry to have annoyed you, but you were and remain wrong. May I suggest a less annoying web-site, perhaps?

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    99. Re:For the love of..... by dbIII · · Score: 1
      Hence my point -- bringing up "Lysenkoism" in a country, where scientists (neither crackpots nor real) can not send other scientists to jail, is a red-herring
      I believe that point is entirely wrong, becuase I do not think that carting people off the the gulag is all that Lysenkoism was about. Other parts of the system of that place and time were responsible for that, and happened before Lysenko had any clout.
    100. Re:For the love of..... by tabrnaker · · Score: 1

      Ok, let's put it this way. You're saying, "i need more proof the further away from MY view of reality your claim is". Sorry, but that's just plain stupid. And i didn't say you were gullible, although you probably are with regards to certain things, i said your type of thinking is what makes it easy for scam artists. You see, scam artists tell plausible stories to hit their marks. They use things that anybody would believe, because that's what sheeple do. If it's part of your mindset, then go right on through, no need for explanations or proof. It also comes down to how you view other people. Trust and believe in them only if it fits YOUR idea of what's possible. You'll be a lot happier and a lot more open minded if you stop seeing yourself as the center of the universe.

    101. Re:For the love of..... by RichardX · · Score: 1

      I have never seen myself as the centre of the universe, nor have I claimed to.
      All I have stated is that extreme claims require extreme proof. I haven't said that no proof is required for lesser claims. Now, it appears that what you're saying is that makes me susceptible to those who make false claims under the guise of simple or easily believable statements. As it happens there are four basic major types of con, the most common of which is the "something for little/nothing" con, which by it's basic nature involves an extreme claim - all the con artist can do is try and mask that claim, as in the 419 scam for instance - though most forms of that are about as subtle as a sledgehammer.

      I still completely fail to see the logic underlying your reasoning here. You appear to be saying that requiring high levels of proof for extreme claims makes a person susceptible to less extreme claims. I require the level of proof appropriate to the claim. If you find yourself being conned under those circumstances it means you have misunderstood the level of claim being made, and let yourself be dazzled by insubstantial evidence for the claim ("Oh, yeah I know it SOUNDS unlikely that I'm a rich ambassador from Nigeria willing to give you millions for almost nothing, but you see, I can explain...")
      I suggest you read up a little on the principles of risk assessment - the basics are very simple, it's a combination of the chances of being wrong (i.e. the claim being false) and the consequences of that being the case. In a situation where you're sending money, especially large sums, although the first part, the claim, may be minor (i.e. plausible), the second part, the consequences if wrong, are quite major depending on the amount of money involved. By concentrating entirely on the first aspect I would suggest that it is you rather than me who makes themselves vulnerable to being scammed.

      At any rate, I live comfortably in the knowledge that in I have never yet been scammed out of anything by anybody, and not for lack of people trying, so my methods appear to be serving me well

      --
      Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
    102. Re:For the love of..... by tabrnaker · · Score: 1

      sigh, who determines if it's an extreme claim? Stop being so defensive and take a look at yourself.

    103. Re:For the love of..... by cryptess · · Score: 1

      He seems to have based the need for evidence upon the urgency of the situation *as well as* the plausability of the claim. This seems sensible enough to me, since the only thing to balance one's own subjective view of things is to use logical assessment of the situation.

      What it comes down to is making a subconscious list of check-points to cross out as you go along. There's a whole spectrum of belief, from none at all to complete belief, which are based on these subconscious check-points.

      And yes. The checkpoints will be based largely on what's important to you, and your own interpretation of life, the universe, and everything -- but as long as you diligently follow your own assessment process, you'll not pass up your own bounds.

      People get scammed, however, when they willfully ignore their own caution due to some level of greed or gullability.

      In short, YOU decide what's an extreme claim, based on your own priorities. And everyone who warns you beforehand is allowed to tisk at you if you get tricked.

      --cryptess
      "You are so mercifully devoid of the ravages of intelligence."
  2. Amazing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The first two attempts to read the article, I got "Nothing to see here, move along."

    Maybe someone psychically teleported the article away?

  3. That money would have been much better spent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    on more effective kill ordinance.

  4. Carte blanche? by October_30th · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Air Force has paid to study

    Heh. I guess that's like during the good old Cold War. If you just got some sort of an idea of how to beat the enemy, you've got a blank check.

    --
    The owls are not what they seem
    1. Re:Carte blanche? by Frymaster · · Score: 1
      If you just got some sort of an idea of how to beat the enemy, you've got a blank check.

      apparently without putting any thought into the implications of the technology being developed! imagine for a moment that teleportation is actually developed. if this technology falls into the "wrong hands" (ie anyone who doesn't subscribe to u.s. hegemony) the result is a total and complete disaster.

      with true, receiverless teleportation, no geographic area is safe. period. governments and financial/industrial institutions would need to go into hiding to avoid attack. the only form of security would be obscurity.

      and that's bad.

    2. Re:Carte blanche? by magarity · · Score: 2, Funny

      if this technology falls into the "wrong hands"

      Dude, it's *psychic* technology... it's in everyone's head already.

    3. Re:Carte blanche? by Nuclear+Elephant · · Score: 1

      if this technology falls into the "wrong hands" (ie anyone who doesn't subscribe to u.s. hegemony) the result is a total and complete disaster.

      Or even worse, what if it malfunctioned and someone was teleported right into Cowboyneail's ass? It's just too darn dangerous.

  5. I think there are bigger things ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... in the military budget to criticize.

  6. USAF Save money in the long run by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They will no longer have to by troop transport planes!

  7. Gypsies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hehe, gypsies are the new secret weapon of the united states miltary

  8. Why is this a surprise? by gkuz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In a country in which a substantially larger portion of the population believes in the Virgin Birth than in evolution through natural selection, and which has just this week demonstrated that majority, why should anyone be surprised?

    1. Re:Why is this a surprise? by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1
      It's not really the same- the Virgin Birth is a traditional doctrine, endorsed by conservatives, and has been around for longer than this nation has. Psychic teleportation is New Age stuff, and the people associated with it generally take a much more liberal standpoint... and are usually a bit further away from the army.

      That's an interesting lie^Wdamned lie^W^Wstatistic about the population, by the way. Was it made up on the spot like 80% of statistics are, or is there somewhere I can see it backed up?

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    2. Re:Why is this a surprise? by the+arbiter · · Score: 1, Informative

      1998 Harris Poll - Eighty-three percent of American adults believe in the Virgin birth of Jesus Christ but only 28 percent believe in evolution.

      Enjoy the Stone Age which we, as a nation, are speeding back to at a pace that would shock even the teleportation guy.

      --
      Boycott everything - they're all trying to fuck you one way or another
    3. Re:Why is this a surprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah.

      And how many more people believed in evolution BEFORE 1998? If your answer isn't "more," then it's not going backwards.

    4. Re:Why is this a surprise? by fatphil · · Score: 1

      THe teleportation guy's mentor is Hal Puthoff.
      Puthoff is one of the inventors of one of the schemes for faster than light travel.

      So you'd better be going back to teh stone age pretty darn quick to impress that guy. Call it forward progress, and you'll have achieved a negative speed - that should impress him.

      FP.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    5. Re:Why is this a surprise? by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually New Age and modern charsismatic evangelicalism have many of the same roots (basically they're the product of early post-modernism). Things like the veneration of subjective experience over objective facts - 'I can feel sense the spirits of the dead' is very close to 'I can feel the Holy Spirit in this room'. They're treating subjective feelings as objective facts.

      Traditional evangelicalism is more like you describe. This was a product of the enlightemnent - everything must be proved/explained - so you'll find those kinds of christian more 'bookish' and generally reject experience as a means to understand anything.

      Interesting society is still changing - I've been to churches where dogma is almost anatheama and everything is debated and reasoned out, and it's not uncommon for everyone to have a completely different opinion - my own feeling is that will be mainstream within 20 years (at the moment it's a few hundred 'emerging' churches), as society is
      already a long way along that road - you can see it in slashdot between the 'QT might be true, you never know' and the 'this is bollocks' type of people, getting into arguments about how it's wrong to say anything is bollocks just based on solid scientific evidence...

    6. Re:Why is this a surprise? by jcr · · Score: 1

      In a country in which a substantially larger portion of the population believes in the Virgin Birth than in evolution through natural selection

      Jesus Haploid Christ!

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    7. Re:Why is this a surprise? by l33t+gambler · · Score: 0

      It seems their belief in God is inverse propotional to their education level. Higher education = more people believ in natural selection.

      Thank you God, for your healing gift of religion.

      --
      Teasing the nobles, and rightfully so!
    8. Re:Why is this a surprise? by Ciel · · Score: 1

      Actually, interestingly enough the trend is entirely in the other direction worldwide - that is, explosive growth in traditional or even fundamentalist strains of Christianity in Latin America, Africa, China, and to a lesser extent in North America.

      Right now, everyone is focused on the rise of Muslim fundamentalism, and most seem to regard it as little more than a reactionary anomaly. However, this couldn't be further from the truth; what is happening in the Middle East is only one facet of a much more complicated emerging geo-religious geometry. For better or worse, secular humanists who take religion to be a dying anachronism are about to have a very rude awakening over the next 50 years. The '04 election is just the beginning...

    9. Re:Why is this a surprise? by Patrik_AKA_RedX · · Score: 1

      I don't understand why everybody here is making such a fuss about this. After all there isn't poverty, deceases, polution nor any other seriouse problem left in the US, right? Must be a true utopia to live in if they can waste money on such programs. It's not like the US citizens would allow incompetent people to run the country right?

  9. Well by ShooterNeo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While highly implausible, the whole idea of science is to discover things that one wouldn't expect. If soundly gathered evidence suggests psychic powers or teleportation is real, then we should investigate it. If the facts fit, then no matter how much someone might not desire to accept an explanation (whether it be for or against any phenomena), it is most likely the truth.

    1. Re:Well by FooAtWFU · · Score: 4, Insightful
      If soundly gathered evidence suggests psychic powers or teleportation is real, then we should investigate it.

      The thing is... it doesn't.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    2. Re:Well by BFaucet · · Score: 4, Funny

      Phychic powers have been studied for centuries. No one has made any convincing argument or presented any substantial evidence in this area.

      I have also called Cleo and she said she sees the project failing.

      --
      -Derick
    3. Re:Well by dlakelan · · Score: 4, Informative

      There is good science to suggest that the conservation of energy is real. This has been tested repeatedly.

      There is also good science to suggest that the theory of relativity is real, every day in particle accelerators across the world it's used to make predictions that turn out.

      The combination of conservation of energy, and relativity suggests that on any largish scale, there can be no teleportation. Of course these things break down when quantum theory is important, but quantum theory seems to be unlikely to be important for the teleportation of large scale objects over large distances.

      the way this goes is that conservation of energy (and mass, which is energy in relativity) must be a local phenomena, because if it is non-local, then two different observers will see things differently, one sees that mass a disappears and mass b appears simultaneously at a different spot, another observer moving in a different relative frame will NOT see these as simultaneous, thereby violating conservation of energy since mass b will appear first, then mass a disappear.

      when you bring in quantum theory, there is uncertainty involved, and relativity hasn't exactly been melded properly with quantum, so things get a little more muddy, but we're talking about very SMALL effects on the order of 10^-34 joule seconds (hbar).

      IN other words, there is already a huge set of scientific evidence against the idea that this is possible.

      --
      ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) http://www.endpointcomputing.com a scientific approach to custom computing.
    4. Re:Well by William+Tanksley · · Score: 1

      I agree, but although I don't care about this document as much as some here seem to (I have to refuse to join the scorn party), I also have to point out that this was done using people's money without their permission (assuming, of course, that the whole thing isn't just a joke, which is my first assumption).

      I think this sort of research should be done at private expense, not at public.

      -Billy

    5. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I think this sort of research should be done at private expense, not at public.

      Nah, we gotta save privitization for social security.

    6. Re:Well by cephyn · · Score: 2, Funny

      But was she expecting your call?

      --
      Moo.
    7. Re:Well by halfelven · · Score: 1

      The thing is... it doesn't.

      So far. ;-)

    8. Re:Well by jeremie · · Score: 1

      That's a very limited perspective, and I'll gamble that as we come to further understand how the universe works, we'll overcome such boxed mindsets.

    9. Re:Well by khayman80 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I agree that this is a serious waste of taxpayer money- this kind of pseudo-scientific bullshit has no place in any government organization.

      However, most scientists that discuss teleportation don't talk about simultaneous teleportation. That *would* definitely be impossible due to relativity, like you mentioned.

      In reality, quantum teleportation is a legitimate scientific topic (that's what I study, as a matter of fact). It's possible because the teleportation isn't instantaneous- it happens at a speed less than or equal to the speed of light. The reason it is called teleportation is that quantum effects are used to make a particle disappear from point A and reappear at point B (a suitable time later) without crossing the intervening space. Cool, huh?

      This effect has already been demonstrated for photons, and limited effects have been demonstrated for single atoms. Whether or not it will ever be possible on a larger scale is a matter of debate... but it isn't a debate about relativity.

    10. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      if she were russian, she would call you!

    11. Re:Well by Carnildo · · Score: 2, Informative

      There is good science to suggest that the conservation of energy is real. This has been tested repeatedly.

      There is also good science to suggest that the theory of relativity is real, every day in particle accelerators across the world it's used to make predictions that turn out.

      The combination of conservation of energy, and relativity suggests that on any largish scale, there can be no teleportation. Of course these things break down when quantum theory is important, but quantum theory seems to be unlikely to be important for the teleportation of large scale objects over large distances.

      the way this goes is that conservation of energy (and mass, which is energy in relativity) must be a local phenomena, because if it is non-local, then two different observers will see things differently, one sees that mass a disappears and mass b appears simultaneously at a different spot, another observer moving in a different relative frame will NOT see these as simultaneous, thereby violating conservation of energy since mass b will appear first, then mass a disappear.


      Actually, it works out. Observer A sees what's happening as teleportation, while Observer B sees it as time travel. You get the same phenomenon when moving something through a wormhole, and the physics of that are fairly well worked out.

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    12. Re:Well by halfelven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There is good science to suggest that the conservation of energy is real. This has been tested repeatedly.
      There is also good science to suggest that the theory of relativity is real, every day in particle accelerators across the world it's used to make predictions that turn out.
      The combination of conservation of energy, and relativity suggests that on any largish scale, there can be no teleportation.


      In the 19th century, there was "good science to suggest" that, given a strong enough rocket engine, objects can be accelerated to speeds bigger than 300000km/s. There was also "good science" that suggested that the space is flat and euclidian.

      What i'm saying is, your argument boils down to "our present knowledge is perfect, thereby anything contradicting it cannot exist."

      I am not saying that said teleportation project is sound and sane. I am saying that one should look at whatever paradigm he/she adheres to with caution.
      Too often i see people otherwise rational that seem to imply that psychic phenomena are made impossible by the simple fact that a million newagers believe in them ("if a pothead believes in X, then X does not exist"). A million newagers may have an irrational belief, yet that does not make certain things impossible.

      Again, i am not implying anything, i just don't like it when people take a transitory scientific paradigm as dogma.

    13. Re:Well by faragon · · Score: 1

      Still I have to admit that your arguments are a delice, which I subscribe with no doubt, may be you're not discusing the main thread. It's sad for me to rebate your arguments, as I'm against superstition as much I can, but in science we must try to be fair. Let me try to explain a short analysis:

      i) Your arguments, individually, seems to be right
      ii) Your conclusion, isn't enough strong, i.e., it is wrong

      Explanation:

      a) As example (absurd reduction to invalidate your conclusion), no one said that the "teletransportation" of atoms/^H^H^H^H^H^Hmolecules/objects has to be related to the same portion of mass (matter).
      b) There is no "scientific evidence" that can invalidate a hypothetical physical fact, as scientific evidences are abstracts of known things/universe, you can always find a more acurate model for the universe. You can refute an hypothetical physical fact with your "current physic universe model", but you *can't* invalidate against other future model, in science you have to be modest (that argumentation hurts my heart, as opossing to your nice scientific argumentation, but it is a necesity to do a complete fair play to achieve some degree in the cartesian method ;-).

      Subjective observation: personally, I think that any country government has other most important scientific targets. I see as stupid investigations related to "telekinesis", "mental *put your stupidity here*", teletransportation, or whatever related thing trying to scientifice superstition. There must be a theoric basis to start to perform any investigation line, other way is wasting tons of money in burocrat/pseudoscientifics.

    14. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But why bother teleporting when you can just kill the enemy with a psyonic blast? That's how we usually did it in D&D. Someone better tell Gary Gygax to apply for some funding?

    15. Re:Well by Moofie · · Score: 1

      So far, we haven't developed a perpetual motion machine either. What's your point?

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    16. Re:Well by DrXym · · Score: 1
      Except there is no soundly gathered evidence. Not a sausage. Nothing. No properly controlled study has has found evidence for any "New Age" phenomena be it ghosts, esp, remote viewing, spoon bending or whatever.


      How long do you continue to waste your time looking? How long before you conclude it's all in the imagination?

    17. Re:Well by winwar · · Score: 1

      "What i'm saying is, your argument boils down to "our present knowledge is perfect, thereby anything contradicting it cannot exist.""

      No it wasn't, at least how I read it. It said the EVIDENCE was against it. New evidence can overcome old. But wishing something was true does not make it so.....

      "In the 19th century, there was "good science to suggest" that, given a strong enough rocket engine, objects can be accelerated to speeds bigger than 300000km/s. There was also "good science" that suggested that the space is flat and euclidian."

      Well, was it good science? I would say not, IF it was widely accepted WITHOUT critical analysis. The data was obviously flawed. But note that you use the word "suggested", not proven-which suggests that "science" was open to the possibility of new and better data.

      "I am not saying that said teleportation project is sound and sane. I am saying that one should look at whatever paradigm he/she adheres to with caution."

      You do realize this makes no sense from a SCIENCE standpoint? Paradigms are the end result of scientific experiments, hypotheses, theories, and laws. You DON'T start with them. He has a hypothesis, nothing more.

      "Again, i am not implying anything, i just don't like it when people take a transitory scientific paradigm as dogma."

      Yes, well, unfortunately that happens. What are the phases of science (paraphrasing poorly): 1. First everyone thinks you are an idiot, 2. then grudging acceptance (hmm, he/she might be right), 3. this is "THE TRUTH" (tm), 4. it's all wrong, 5. faults and strengths honestly evaluated. Unfortunately it often takes a lifetime or more....

    18. Re:Well by Zangief · · Score: 1

      No, what you will be asking yourself for decades is "If Cleo wouldn't have mentioned the failing, the project would have succeded?".

    19. Re:Well by bholub · · Score: 1

      mind = blown What are these "quantum effects" (used to make a particle disappear and reappear) and how many pages would it take to explain?

      --
      I farted
    20. Re:Well by dlakelan · · Score: 1

      Observer B sees it as violation of conservation of energy. So either CofE is wrong, or it won't happen.

      I'm not saying that
      1) Conservation of energy is true
      2) Relativity is true

      I'm just saying that they are the best things we have at the moment, they have never been observed to be violated in a definite and irrefutable way.

      Therefore unless there is some new data to suggest that these things are not true, pursuing this particular line of research is a poor use of military funds.

      Note: as for quantum teleportation, yes a particle or set of particles can appear in location a, and then later appear in location b, without ever being observed between the two locations. However, because we haven't got a satisfactory relativistic quantum theory, it's not clear what is necessary for this to happen over large distances.

      However, for a large body to behave this way (as opposed to a few tens or so of atoms or photons or whatever) you have to have them all behaving as one big particle, a mega-boson or something... This sort of research is already being done, and does not relate as far as I can tell to the linked research.

      --
      ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) http://www.endpointcomputing.com a scientific approach to custom computing.
    21. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > mind = blown What are these "quantum effects" (used to make a particle disappear and reappear) and how many pages would it take to explain?

      Many. Thing is, there's no teleportation involved, it's more like copying one particle into another pre-existing one. Or more accurately, its "spin" (which is really just some very abstract property of the particle, they're not really spinning around). Look up "quantum teleportation" on wikipedia for a sort-of layman's summary.

    22. Re:Well by bigberk · · Score: 1
      ... conservation of energy is real ... theory of relativity is real ... suggests that on any largish scale, there can be no teleportation ... quantum theory seems to be unlikely to be important for the teleportation of large scale ... IN other words, there is already a huge set of scientific evidence against the idea
      I think the proposed teleportation stuff is crap too, but seriously, you are sounding overconfident. Everything you say is based on theories, and some of slashdot's readership is older than the freshest theories. QM theory has been tinkered with over time as new holes were found. All I'm saying is, nothing is certain. Theories are revised, and intuition is not what governs reality.
    23. Re:Well by fatphil · · Score: 1

      "In the 19th century, there was "good science to suggest" that, given a strong enough rocket engine, objects can be accelerated to speeds bigger than 300000km/s."

      THere was also good, better even, science to suggest that it was impossible. Newton and (Daniel, it's a big family) Bernoulli stitched that up, in the negative, over a century earlier.

      FP.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    24. Re:Well by khayman80 · · Score: 1
      Not surprisingly, it's quite complicated. It's taken me nearly 5 years of college and 1 year of grad school to understand how this works at even a rudimentary level. I am by *no* means an expert in this field, I'm just getting started...

      The most constructive thing I can do is give you some buzzwords to google for. Quantum teleportation is possible because of a quantum effect known as "quantum entanglement", an effect that was predicted in the 1930's and proven experimentally in the 1970s and 1980s. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find any decent references for this effect on the web in my ~5 minute search. On the other hand, if you want to see what a real scientific explanation of quantum teleportation looks like, check this out. The first page actually looks like it's pretty comprehensible.

    25. Re:Well by fyngyrz · · Score: 1
      You get the same phenomenon when moving something through a wormhole, and the physics of that are fairly well worked out.

      Yah... it's all worked out...

      Scientist one: I just put our lab rat through a wormhole!

      Scientist two: Sigh. We're gonna need a new lab rat.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    26. Re:Well by arth1 · · Score: 1
      In the 19th century, there was "good science to suggest" that, given a strong enough rocket engine, objects can be accelerated to speeds bigger than 300000km/s. There was also "good science" that suggested that the space is flat and euclidian.

      What i'm saying is, your argument boils down to "our present knowledge is perfect, thereby anything contradicting it cannot exist."


      There's a big difference. One is science, and the other is belief. Research based on belief is a big waste, and there's never been a case where belief led to new discoveries -- rather the opposite, like clinging to the belief that the earth was the center of the universe. Sure, science can be wrong too, but then it's new science that disproves it, not research based on belief.

      But I'm not really surprised at this. After all, the country is led by a guy who admits to talking to an invisible alien.

      Regards,
      --
      *Art
    27. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree that you are an idiot.

      Stanford University wastes more money on flower arrangements for the president's antechamber than has been spent total on levitation or psychokinetic lava lamps or whatever, in all history.

      These flower arrangements are paid for by your tax dollars (yes, I know Stanford is a private school, but do you know how much Federal funding they receive? All of it.)

      Let me not get started on military brass bands.

      All in all, I welcome the waste of $25,000 of my tax dollars on some crackpot. This morning an F-16 accidentally fired on a school in Long Island and did more damage than this crackpot will do in his life ... and that one mission probably cost more than the crackpot spent on bending spoons with his mind!

    28. Re:Well by Esion+Modnar · · Score: 1
      quantum effects are used to make a particle disappear from point A and reappear at point B

      OK, here's been my basic problem with most ideas of what teleportation would be like. The Star Trek notion is, you have a device which scans every atom in your body, like a 3D fax machine, destroys the original, and re-assembles you somewhere else. What I've never understood is, would that be with the "same" atoms, or atoms drawn from an elemental stock room, aka a rather goopy teleportation toner cartridge?

      But, technical issues aside, I have a philosophical problem with allowing myself to be destroyed, atom by atom or otherwise, with even the most earnest promise that an exact copy of me will be built somewhere else. Even if the copy looked like me, thought like me, etc., it wouldn't be me. I'd insist on the copy being made first, and then I'd resist destruction like any normal living being.

      On the other hand, the atoms which compose your body are being exchanged daily as part of natural processes. It may be that after a number of years, perhaps decades, there is no single atom which is the same. Yet you are still you. Your memories provide the continuity.

      The problem is in the copying-destroying sequence of events. A baseball or an overnight letter is not copied and destroyed in the process of being physically moved.

      True teleportation would have to somehow move objects from point A to point B, not copy and destroy.

      --

      They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
    29. Re:Well by Khith · · Score: 1

      One word: telefrags

    30. Re:Well by Fringex · · Score: 1

      the way this goes is that conservation of energy (and mass, which is energy in relativity) must be a local phenomena, because if it is non-local, then two different observers will see things differently, one sees that mass a disappears and mass b appears simultaneously at a different spot, another observer moving in a different relative frame will NOT see these as simultaneous, thereby violating conservation of energy since mass b will appear first, then mass a disappear.

      The way I figure it for teleportation... all our current thinking is three dimensional. We rely on what we know to define what can and can't happen yet history proves this is wrong. I personally think teleportation can and one day will work. Even over large distances. It is a matter of redefining what we know and what we think we know.

      Since everything in science is really theory, we shouldn't close the door on a potential scientific break through.

      Now with what was mentioned above with the way it was explained. If I am to teleport from point A to point B, I will remain Mass A regardless. Observer A will see me disappear and reappear at point B. Same for Observer B. I disappear here and reappear there. Simple really.

    31. Re:Well by monkeyfamily · · Score: 1

      Besides the long-distance quantum entanglement effects that are referred to as teleportation, a particle can "be" on one side of a barrier and then "be" on the other side without having to exist inside the barrier or breaching it. This is because a particle's position is an uncertain quantity, described by a probability cloud. The probability of the particle being on one side of the barrier is initially very high. Certain circumstances then cause the probability distribution to tend toward the other side of the barrier.

    32. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I agree that this is a serious waste of taxpayer money- this kind of pseudo-scientific bullshit has no place in any government organization.
      Supposedly this type of thinking burned Giordano Bruno and others alike. Evolution is all about timing and history has demonstrated it thoroughly. Releasing these documents now sound sensationalistic but since we live in a Universe based on relative laws nothing is impossible. Only impossible to comprehend by the limited mind a reader way too much anchored in his own "material world" and unable to even dare to see beyond. All the debate and stir caused by this subject only shows the percent of blindness people choose to live in.
    33. Re:Well by j1m+5n0w · · Score: 1
      The reason it is called teleportation is that quantum effects are used to make a particle disappear from point A and reappear at point B (a suitable time later) without crossing the intervening space.

      Hmm, that sounds like a nice way of solving that pesky last mile problem without having to deal with the local ILEC, cable right-of-way, radio interference, or FCC licensing. From the wikipedia article, it doesn't sound like anyone's tried this over large distances though. Are there any issues which prevent quantum teleportation from being practical as a communications channel (besides not having having been festooned with acronyms by the IEEE)?

      -jim

    34. Re:Well by jcr · · Score: 1

      If soundly gathered evidence suggests psychic powers

      It hasn't yet, and the woo-woos have been trying really hard for a really long time..

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    35. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's a good philosophical answer for you, and you even set it up nicely with the statement that your atoms are slowly migrated out of your body and replaced.

      You are information. That's it. You, the physical being are a configuration of atoms, and that configuration is all that matters. Give or take a few atoms and you don't even notice. Get an MRI and rotate your hydrogen atoms around, no problem.

      On a more fundamental level, all atoms are created equal. For all we know they are equivalent waveforms in different locations. For all practical purposes the atoms in your body exist everywhere in physical facsimile, just not in arrangement.

      To transport yourself, simple rearrange atoms in the remote location into the same configuration as the atoms at your current location. Do it in the blink of an eye, and you won't notice.

      Now, the philosophical problem you raise is simply the problem of copying you. That will probably be an available technology long before long distance teleportation is available. It feels weird. You know both copies will be YOU in all respects, and neither will believe being told that they are a copy. It's not a natural thing for a mind to be duplicated, it messes with all the inbuilt self preservation mechanisms and your sense of self. Maybe we will either be able to remove that, or we'll just have to deal with the fact that we are just information and can be copied, reconstructed, or destroyed. I think the real aversion to copying is that generally copying is performed to give one copy an advantage, either creating a more healthy body or maybe transporting to a new and exciting space station. The old copy has to lie around sick or stay on an overcrowded earth. In a sense, *one* of you will never get to do all the fun things your copy or teleportation image will get to do, and that is utterly depressing. The only solution is the destruction of the inferior copy of the information. But nature has insctinctively programmed us with destruction=bad. No matter that your copied or teleported self would be none the worse, assuming an exact copy. That copy would also know that "it" had died utterly in another place on earth, possibly with extra memories that would never be known to the new copy. We have a fundamental inability to deal with our true nature rationally. It will take drugs or mind alteration to deal with it, most likely.

      And in the end, what's so different about the you of one or two minutes ago being forever gone and unable to change the future or experience anything ever again? Our past selves are just as dead as any original left over after a copy or teleport, but we don't mourn them. Because we're used to leaving behind the remnants of the time dimension. How much harder to deal with leaving behind spacial history as well?

    36. Re:Well by javaman235 · · Score: 1

      I was just reading an article on that. I understand that quantum teleportation works through a "Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (EPR) correlation", rather than actual physical data moving anywhere, its a correlation between particle behaviors, right? Does that mean that its faster than light speed?

      --
      -The art of programming is the pursuit of absolute simplicity.
    37. Re:Well by ByteSlicer · · Score: 1

      The two entangled (EPR correlated) particles will change simultaneously when one of them is used to measure quantum state A. The other of the pair can then be used at site B to reconstruct the quantum state A. To do this, one still needs the result of the measurement on A to be sent to B (at best at light speed). The entangled particle B along with this result can be recombined to an exact copy of A. It has been shown that entanglement can never transfer any information by itself.

    38. Re:Well by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1
      You also have to understand that "particles" are merely packets of energy. If you were to zoom in on an empty chunk of space, you would actually see bits of matter spontenously appear and disappear, like waves on a stormy sea. What we view as matter exists only on finite packets. Energy can build up and build up, but it doesn't take form until it passes a threshold.

      What may be happening is a photon gets snagged by a swell in spacetime that drops the particle below the amount of energy required to exist. The bundle of energy continues on it's merry way, and pops back into existance after the depression crests.

      Imagine a dune buggy that hits a depression. If you were watching it, it would seem to disappear momentarily, then reappear a short time later in a slightly different spot.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    39. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      We rely on what we know to define what can and can't happen yet history proves this is wrong.

      Actually, I can't think of any examples at all, no matter how I try, that shows this to be true. Maybe you can point one out?

      Sure, there are plenty of examples you could use that entail religious beliefs stating something that confilcts with reality as we see it, but faith and knowledge are highly contrasting concepts.

      People have believed flight was possible for ages. People in Ancient Greece and Rome had technology for curing diseases, and "safely" doing some surgeries. We have found archeological evidence that may someday prove there was a trade route between South America and the mediteranian sometime in B.C., not to mention the viking who came to America (around 1000 A.D.) when Leif Eriksson came across the sea (while most of the "civilized" world's faith said the earth was flat).

      Really not much has changed in what we "can" do in the past 2000 or so years, let alone our ideas of what we "can" do. The only thing that has changed is the degree to which we can do it (depressing when you stop to think about it).

      Will we one day be able to teleport things, at least in the sence of destroying you in an incredibly painful way, after taking a quick scan of your makeup and reassemble your scan elsewhere (the scan of course being 2 seconds earlier than the pain of being destroyed, and hence, no memory would remain of said pain. Yay)? Probably. I don't think anyone is really arguing that that isn't possible.

      Will we be able to move ourselves to Mars using nothing but the desire to be there? No. Never. Not anytime in the next million years. There is no maybe about it. No, No we will not.

      People like http://id-www.ucsb.edu/fscf/library/RUSSELL/FlatEa rth.html this man are behind pretty much anything that says otherwise. (By the way, that's actually a very funny article to read after being awake 40 hours straight... note how he says that everybody with "common sense" knows the earth is flat because they can stand on a mountain and see 40 miles away on a clear day)

      That's right, All people who believe in psychic happenings are paranoid crazy nutball idiots with broken logic centers.

    40. Re:Well by MoralHazard · · Score: 1

      Again, i am not implying anything, i just don't like it when people take a transitory scientific paradigm as dogma.

      Jesus Teabagging Christ. In the 19th Century, BEFORE the experimental evidence to support relativity was in, you would have been a grade-A, unscientific idiot to start gabbing about how you couldn't accelerate that rocket to 3x10^6 km/sec. You may have been right, but it would be entirely coincidental because without evidence, you're talking out your ass!

      Besides, the original poster isn't saying "There's no evidence to support teleportation," he's pointing out (correctly) that there are a number of concrete, well-demonstrated experimental and theoretical results that provide evidence against teleportation. Big fucking difference, mate! This is more like saying, in the 19th century, that if you start accelerating an object to 3x10^6 km/sec, that object will continue accelerating on its own with no additional energy input.

      Notice the difference? There are things that HAVE ALREADY BEEN DISPROVEN, as opposed to things that have yet to be proven OR disproven. And teleportation, like FTL travel, seems to be in the latter category.

      (For the record, I was a student of Alan Sokal's at NYU, and this is one of his favorite PoMo arguments to debunk.)

    41. Re:Well by RichardX · · Score: 1

      I am not a physicist, or even close, but....

      Surely your objection there is only to a device which teleports *instantly* - like a fax machine which spits out the output at the exact same time as reading the input.

      if you think of a teleporter more like a conventional fax machine - where it scans the input (subatomic structure, or whatever), encodes it as data, transmits it to the output node (non-instantaneously) then rebuilds it at the other end from the data.. then it's just a very difficult physics problem, isn't it? rather than an impossible one. Okay, quantum uncertainty would probably get in the way of scanning/rebuilding the object, but the basic concept of teleportation isn't all that unreasonable is it?

      --
      Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
    42. Re:Well by RichardX · · Score: 1

      What I've never understood is, would that be with the "same" atoms, or atoms drawn from an elemental stock room

      IANAP - anyone more qualified feel free to correct me if wrong, but...
      As far as I'm aware the answer to this doesn't actually matter. To give an example, let's substitute you for a word (as in a word of text), and your atoms for the letters that make up the word

      Get to any place on your computer where you can type. Type out a word, say, your name: "Esion" now, place your cursor next to the s and hit backspace.. now hit the s key again...

      What just happened? you deleted the letter s then immediately replaced it. Question is, is that the *same* letter s that was there before you deleted it, or a different one? - answer: it doesn't matter, there's no way to tell*

      (* Yes, getting really picky you could trawl through the computer's memory to see if the first and second S's were stored in different memory locations, that would be a difference, but let's assume were both stored in the exact same part of the computer's memory)

      --
      Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
    43. Re:Well by Fringex · · Score: 1

      Will we one day be able to teleport things, at least in the sence of destroying you in an incredibly painful way, after taking a quick scan of your makeup and reassemble your scan elsewhere (the scan of course being 2 seconds earlier than the pain of being destroyed, and hence, no memory would remain of said pain. Yay)? Probably. I don't think anyone is really arguing that that isn't possible.

      Will we be able to move ourselves to Mars using nothing but the desire to be there? No. Never. Not anytime in the next million years. There is no maybe about it. No, No we will not.

      Why not? Why does it have to be painful? Why are we limiting ourselves to a 3 dimensional thinking when there is a possibility that it can be done.

      There really is no evidence supporting the idea that it can or cannot be done. You can bring relativity into this all you want but you can't support fact with theory. Show me absolute hard evidence that it can't be done.

      People have believed flight was possible for ages.

      This is the history I talk about. People believed it to be so. It was a lack of science that kept this dream from becoming reality. People believed that it was possible but no one had any clue how to pull it off. Same for teleportation. Some believe it to be so yet lack the science to pull it off. To say it is impossible is to say flight is impossible. Nothing is impossible with out limited knowledge of the universe.

    44. Re:Well by Esion+Modnar · · Score: 1
      Very interesting analogy. But that's just information. No matter is expended, like ink in a typewriter.

      I suppose at the elemental level there is no difference between one hydrogen atom (for instance) and another. (Don't know, definitely wading in the deep end now.) So if the spec for my body called for x number of hydrogen atoms in such and so an arrangement, so many helium atoms, etc., then, atom by atom there would be no difference.

      But at least from a practical standpoint, the difference comes in, when you actually have to provide a mass of replacement atoms. Transmitting a 200 lb man requires at least 200 lbs of all the right elements prelocated at the destination.

      So then, in the Star Trek scenario, do they send these elements down by shuttle first, or do they somehow cull the necessary particles from the local environment? If that were the case, they'd never be able to beam down to a mostly metallic world, or, into the vacuum of space. (Been done, I think, sorry, can't cite the ep. ;))

      If teleportation were simply a matter of disassembling your atoms, squirting them through a wormhole or some other space whatsis, and then reassembling them at the destination, then the most objection I'd have to the whole process would be the squeamishness of being "atomized."

      Put another way, it's the difference between me FedEx'ing you a cup of my (not so) famous chili, and just emailing you the recipe.

      --

      They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
    45. Re:Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is their definition of sound I believe, you see they think that soundly gathered means aurally gathered, as in someone said it. As opposed to soundly gathered, as in someone who is sane said it :D

  10. Bait and Switch? by Hallowed · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'd say this is a fast one they are trying to pull to funnel the money to some black project....hell it could just be for the AF general staff coffee and doughnut fund!

    --

    1. When the pin is pulled, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend.

    2. Do not eat iPod shuffle.

    1. Re:Bait and Switch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work for AFRL and I think we need to be defended. We pay for our own coffes and doughnuts!

    2. Re:Bait and Switch? by LabRat007 · · Score: 1

      "I'd say this is a fast one they are trying to pull to funnel the money to some black project"

      If that was the intent I would expect them to make up a project that would attract much less attention. Like a study on aircraft landing Anomalies involving albatrose.

      If your comment was intended to be humorous please accept my apologies. I've been siting in an uncomfortable chair and my sense of humor has fallen asleep.

      --
      "Capital punishment makes the state into a murderer. Imprisonment makes the state into a gay dungeon-master"
  11. random slashdot quote by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    classically, the random slashdot quote at the bottom of this article was "You cannot achieve the impossible without attempting the absurd."

    Dan Tedrick

    1. Re:random slashdot quote by Holi · · Score: 1

      It makes me think that the so called "random quotes" may not be so random.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
  12. Winning the war on terror? by fredistheking · · Score: 0, Troll

    Osama said he wanted to bankrupt the US.

    -

  13. Classified by dmomo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's probably money procured for something they don't want to tell us they are using it for.

    1. Re:Classified by Xerp · · Score: 1

      Couldn't they just make any negative documents.. um.. disappear? :)

    2. Re:Classified by Tongo · · Score: 1

      The General Accounting Office still has to account for all funds that are given to the Air Force. Likewise the Air Force must account for how it used the money (or something along those lines). If the Air Force doesn't want anyone to know how much it's spending on black ops, it inflates other budgets or creates false projects (like many think this is) to have a place to stick the money, instead of just having the money disappear.

    3. Re:Classified by _the_bascule · · Score: 1
      ...U.S. military studies of spoon-bending phenomena.
      Err tell me this is not true
      --
      Our diversity is our strength
    4. Re:Classified by Tongo · · Score: 1

      I think that's what my previous post was alluding to. But then again, Uri Geller may have used his stupidness...er stupendous powers to influence policy makers to study his cash cow.

    5. Re:Classified by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      That was my theory, personally. Who knows what those people were actually doing in that lab? Probably working on railguns and playing quake, while the research the funds actually went to was done in another state. Or, even, another country.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  14. With the current administration... by myowntrueself · · Score: 5, Insightful

    With the current, rather theocratic US administration, I'm surprised they don't try training field medics in faith healing...

    --
    In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    1. Re:With the current administration... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      What, EXACTLY, has Bush done that is Theocratic?

      Please give examples.

    2. Re:With the current administration... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He mentioned God.

      Just like every other prsident in the past few hundred years...

    3. Re:With the current administration... by mmkay76 · · Score: 0

      Nope, until he abolishes an involuntary income tax system, this is not a theocratic administration. I beleive one of the commandments says "Thou shall not steal".

    4. Re:With the current administration... by JFitzsimmons · · Score: 5, Informative

      Link 1
      Link 2
      Just a couple of examples.

      --
      Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master. -Anonymous
    5. Re:With the current administration... by DAldredge · · Score: 0

      Son a a BITCH!!!!

      You mean he wants church goers to vote for him! How EVIL!!!

      You do know that the DEMS do the EXACT SAME FUCKING THING DON'T YOU?

      You just want to bitch about something.

    6. Re:With the current administration... by donbrock · · Score: 0

      After that rant, we're supposed to buy a computer from you?

    7. Re:With the current administration... by donbrock · · Score: 0

      Just off the top of my head... 1. Banning government funds for stem cell research because it kills cells that will be thrown out anyway. 2. Wanting a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Do we want to write a clause into the constitional to specify discrimination against a minority group? 3. Generally wearing his religion on his sleeve after spending half his life as as alcoholic and drug addict.

    8. Re:With the current administration... by Carnildo · · Score: 3, Funny

      You mean, besides announcing that God speaks through him?

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    9. Re:With the current administration... by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 1
      Link 1 merely talks about asking politically-similar churches to help in the campaign. This is no different from the Democratic use of black churches as campaign grounds.

      Link 2 concerns allowing religious organisations to apply for the same charitable grants that non-religious organisations can. That's only fair. The state does not discrimate against the religious when it hires employees; why should it discriminate against the religious when it hires organisations?

    10. Re:With the current administration... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I'll bite.

      He formulates his opinions of foreign leaders by "looking into their souls" (as with Putin, whose soul apparently looked good)
      He removes fictional barriers preventing religious groups from using state money, creating policies which allow religious groups to use state money for religious purposes (see Catholic Community Services, which has had no problems keeping the books for their religious and non-religious activities separate, without incident, for years before Bush notified us all of this problem crippling charitable organizations)
      He promotes policies which appeal to a religious sense of righteousness, but are often actually counterproductive when independently assessed (abstinence education has worked, but never in the US; D.A.R.E. increases a child's likelihood of experimenting with drugs--please note that D.A.R.E. predates Bush, but it's a faith-based program in the sense that with all the evidence around, you must have deep faith in it to keep supporting it)
      When confronted with a religious fanatic who claims that Islam has declared war on the U.S. (even though the Islamic world did not support this zealot), he takes the "religious war" seriously and commences attacking unrelated nations with Islamic populations (even though their governments are nonreligious and have a longstanding antagonism with said fanatic)
      When asked about activist judges, answers with a completely unfathomable answer about the Dred Scott case. Why? Although slavery WAS codified into the Constitution and therefore it would actually have to be an "activist judge" who ruled in favor of Dred Scott--Bush knew that the Dred Scott case has special meaning to anti-abortion religious groups, who regularly use it as an example case. Actual meaning of the Dred Scott comment: "Although abortion, like slavery at the time of Dred Scott, is legal, I will change either judges or the Constitution until it is not legal." It was a bold religious pronouncement, and only the faithful could decipher it. Heathens thought he was just being stupid again.
      Through his secretaries, begins an unprecedented purge of indecent and sinful material from the public airwaves.
      Gets public funding for religious education through educational "choice" programs, designed to draw students away from underfunded public schools where they cannot receive religious training.
      Believes that God selected him to run the country. Coincidentally, cannot specify a single mistake he's made while running the country (the only plausible explanations for this are divine infallibility or arrogance--I choose both)

    11. Re:With the current administration... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      Please provide a link.

    12. Re:With the current administration... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      I don't care if you buy it or not. If you think it is a good deal then buy it, if not then don't.

      And if you want a rant, I can give you one. ;->

      But it pisses me off when one side says that the other side doing something is wrong when they do it themselves. Some how it is wrong for Bush to talk about God, but it is OK when Kerry does the same thing from churches...

    13. Re:With the current administration... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, religious organizations can and have received government money long before Bush came to office (my favorite example is Catholic Community Services because they do such a good job).

      The "problem" Bush seeks to correct is that those religious organizations which receive government money must keep their religious and non-religious activities separate, to ensure that state money doesn't support religious activity (lest it run afoul of the establishment clause of the first amendment). Luckily, this is incredibly easy for any religious organization to do, and CCS has been doing it with great success for longer than I can remember.

      This "discrimination" against religious organizations doesn't exist. The "problem" Bush is correcting is that churches need more money to teach Sunday school and buy bibles, and the financial wall between their charitable and religious activities is keeping the money away.

      I seriously hope everyone reads up on this issue a little more. The way the Bush administration spins it, it really sounds like they're solving a serious problem, but only because they misrepresent the "problem".

    14. Re:With the current administration... by Moofie · · Score: 1

      Where do those links demonstrate that the Church is ruling the State?

      You know that that's what "theocracy" means, right? It does not mean that a person of religious conviction is President.

      I think Bush is a lousy President, but he's not a theocrat.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    15. Re:With the current administration... by RealAlaskan · · Score: 1
      Some of us seem to be hazy on exactly what constitutes theocracy. Maybe a couple of the definitions from that link will help:

      a form of state political organization in which the government is based on religious offices.

      Sounds bad.

      A system of government controlled by the dominating religions beliefs inherent in the society.

      Sounds good, given that you have a set of ``dominating religions beliefs''. If you think that the U.S. doesn't have that, you must be new here. Supreme Court Justice Black said: ``We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being.'' The original government of the U.S., as described in our constitution, would be a theocracy by that definition. It was designed to be controlled by the religious majority.

      Letting religious organizations get a little bit of slops from the pork barrel is a long way from either of those definitions of theocracy.

    16. Re:With the current administration... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      turn on your tv, he says it all the time don't tune to FOX of course

    17. Re:With the current administration... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you cant substantiate your claim?

    18. Re:With the current administration... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, the US is a far cry different than country like Thailand (mostly Buddhists), Greece (mostly Greek Orthodox. If you ain't G.O. in Greece, you're a second-class citizen), or Italy (the Pope. 'nuff said). And it's a FAR cry different than Taliban Afghanistan, or most other Islamist countries.

      Maybe it's that Christianity is SO fractured, especially the protestant side of the aisle. About all people can say is "evangelical" christians as criticism. There are a lot of people who fit or don't fit that definition, depending on how you look at it.

      The irony of the problems in Palestine are that Christianity, *including Europe*, seems content to let its spiritual home be argued over by two other groups instead of taking a more active stand in the situation, by saying, "well, guys, some of these sites are important to Christianity as well, and we're going to not let you trash them anymore in the name of your petty arguments".

      "It's the Shoe!"

    19. Re:With the current administration... by DAldredge · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      IOW, you are full of shit and have no proof.

      Typical.

    20. Re:With the current administration... by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      You must have missed your marching orders. ANYTHING that treats Christianity in any positive manner whatsoever is defined to be theocratic.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    21. Re:With the current administration... by Brandybuck · · Score: 1

      Well considering this is a study on psychic powers, and every patron of the "Psychic Powers Center" down the street from me look like they just stepped out of a Kerry fundraiser, I don't think this has anything at all to do with the current administration.

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
    22. Re:With the current administration... by eliktronik · · Score: 2, Informative

      He said it to an Amish group in Lancaster, PA:

      "I trust God speaks through me. Without that, I couldn't do my job."

      http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1172948/p osts

      It's also been reported in many other places, just do a google search.

    23. Re:With the current administration... by fatphil · · Score: 1

      "The very first act of the new Bush administration was to have a Protestant Evangelist minister officially dedicate the inauguration to Jesus Christ, whom he declared to be 'our savior.' Invoking 'the Father, the Son, the Lord Jesus Christ' and 'the Holy Spirit,' Billy Graham's son, the man selected by President George W. Bush to bless his presidency, excluded the tens of millions of Americans who are Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Shintoists, Unitarians, agnostics, and atheists from his blessing by his particularistic and parochial language.
      "The plain message conveyed by the new administration is that George W. Bush's America is a Christian nation and that non-Christians are welcome into the tent so long as they agree to accept their status as a tolerated minority rather than as fully equal citizens. In effect, Bush is saying: 'This is our home, and in our home we pray to Jesus as our savior. If you want to be a guest in our home, you must accept the way we pray.'"
      -- Alan M. Dershowitz, in "Bush Starts Off by Defying the the Constitution," Los Angeles Times, January 24, 2001

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    24. Re:With the current administration... by fatphil · · Score: 1

      "God told me to strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East."
      -- George W. Bush, according to Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas, from minutes acquired by Haaretz from cease-fire negotiations between Abbas and faction leaders from the Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Popular and Democratic Fronts (circa June, 2003), quoted from Arnon Regular, "'Road map is a life saver for us,' PM Abbas tells Hamas" (Haaretz.com:June 27, 2003)

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    25. Re:With the current administration... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you even bother to read link 1? I didn't think so.

    26. Re:With the current administration... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "problem" Bush is correcting is that churches need more money to teach Sunday school and buy bibles, and the financial wall between their charitable and religious activities is keeping the money away.

      Completely false. You did better in your prior paragraph.

      The "problem" Bush seeks to correct is that those religious organizations which receive government money must keep their religious and non-religious activities separate, to ensure that state money doesn't support religious activity (lest it run afoul of the establishment clause of the first amendment).

      This is closer to a statement of the real problem. Sure religous organizations can be involved, just so long as nothing of their religous values are visible or identifiable. That was the rule even when the programs with values based on religion (even without actual religous practice), or run by overtly religous organizations, were far more effective than any purely secular program. That was the case when they were a far better value, i.e. less expensive / more effective. The old policy: less effective, more costly, exclusionary. Better? No.

    27. Re:With the current administration... by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

      No, in fact if they met with any success they'd doubtless be burnt as witches

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    28. Re:With the current administration... by fyngyrz · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Link 2 concerns allowing religious organisations to apply for the same charitable grants that non-religious organisations can. That's only fair.

      It is not fair until religious organizations pay taxes. Presently, they're parasites, a condition created and continuously enabled by pathological government favoritism.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    29. Re:With the current administration... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > IOW, you are full of shit and have no proof.

      You know, if you keep saying that, it will just magically come true.

      > Typical.

      You might want to stop typing now, and read some of the sibling replies to the grandparent, because you're making a real cunt of yourself.

      I've gotta say, the look suits you.

    30. Re:With the current administration... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if the parent did, you'd whine like a silly child that internet posts and articles don't count for anything.

      I have to observe that you must very, very carefully select what you pay attention to if you've never heard or scene Bush state that he believes his (mythical) god works through him.

    31. Re:With the current administration... by Colonel+Cholling · · Score: 1

      and every patron of the "Psychic Powers Center" down the street from me look like they just stepped out of a Kerry fundraiser,

      Wow! You can tell someone's politics just by looking at them? You must be psychic too!

      --

      I am Sartre of the Borg. Existence is futile.
    32. Re:With the current administration... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " Some how it is wrong for Bush to talk about God, but it is OK when Kerry does the same thing from churches..."

      I have no problem with people who claim to talk to god, the problem comes in when they claim that god talks to them.

      Thats when it ceases to be superstitional nonsense & becomes a psychological disorder.

    33. Re:With the current administration... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Letting religious organizations get a little bit of slops from the pork barrel is a long way from either of those definitions of theocracy."

      Yea, & invading Poland is a long way from bringing the whole world into chaos & war.

    34. Re:With the current administration... by magefile · · Score: 1

      Look, I distrust faith-based charities too (what? To get fed, I have to confess my sins and take communion?), but 504(c)3s don't pay taxes either. Now, if churches are profit-making, you would have a point.

    35. Re:With the current administration... by magefile · · Score: 1

      Crap, that should've read 501(c)3. Sorry - I've had Sect. 504 on my mind a lot lately (ADA-related stuff).

    36. Re:With the current administration... by fyngyrz · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Now, if churches are profit-making, you would have a point.

      No. I have a point anyway. A very solid one. I'll make it in some detail for you to pick at.

      Look here: I pay taxes; the government builds roads. My family drives on roads and otherwise benefits from roads. So I am really pretty happy to pay for roads.

      In sharp contrast, the church doesn't pay taxes. However, churchies drive on roads, the materials to build their churches are delivered on roads, etc.

      Ergo - and there really is no way out of this - I, and other taxpayers, pay for the churchies to drive on and otherwise benefit from roads. There is zero way out of this. They're not paying, I am, and they get the benefit. So I'm paying for them.

      The problem here - and it is a huge problem - is that I do not support the idea of giving free stuff to churches. I support the idea that if you want to give free stuff to a church, that is perfectly OK, of course. But you don't have my authority to give my stuff to a church, just because you like it.

      As it turns out, since the funds are now in government hands, the government is paying for churchies to drive on roads. This is blatent religious favoritism, at the very least, and nepotism as far as the usual administration goes, because we usually have a bunch of religious yahoos running the country, who of course have no problem giving my money to a church in this fashion.

      Any supposedly "non-profit" operation gets this benefit (which is what I presume you were referring to with your tax section quote - I can't quote sections, that's why I have an accountant and a lawyer, but anyway...)

      The problem here is staring us right in the face. If the church or any NP receives a major benefit derived from my money that I do not and for which they do not have to share in equal cost - like roads, defense of property, lunch, etc... then I am being robbed; it may seem like Robin Hood style action to the religious folks - manna from heaven, as it were - but it is manna taken out of my little nest egg while they get a free lunch, and I don't like it.

      If I have to pay to drive on roads, so should those people. It is just that simple.

      This applies to everything that I pay taxes for, and the church or a supposedly NP entity does not.

      These entities profit from the stuff that I paid for, because they did not invest in them. Free benefits for them, but I pay.

      Just one more reason I maintain that our government is completely out of control.

      Relevant section of the First Amendment:

      Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

      Now, I read that several ways. It means that congress can't say "you can't create X religion(s)", it means congress can't say "you must adhere to X religion(s)", it means that congress can't say that "you must not adhere to X relgion(s)", it means that congress can't say "you must support X religion(s)", and it means congress can't say "you must not support X religion(s).

      And there is the key: Making me pay for the X's to have free roads is making me support X religion, no matter whether I adhere to it or not, no matter if I want to support it or not. It is government sponsorship - big time - for superstion. It's not just wrong in conscience, not just wrong in principle, but it is entirely wrong constitutionally and therefore has no legitimate basis in law.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    37. Re:With the current administration... by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 1

      Ummm...plenty of non-religious organisations don't pay taxes either. Non-profit organisations may or may not be parasites, but don't pretend that only the religious ones don't pay taxes.

    38. Re:With the current administration... by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 1
      Roads are paid for by taxes, yes: gas taxes. Which are paid by churches and churchgoers just as much as by anyone else (you don't show your Secret Cabal of Faith(tm) card and get to ignore taxes on gas). Religious organisations are a particular type of non-profit organisation (there are charitable non-profits, and educational non-profits as well as some others which I cannot recall). So far as I know, all non-profit organisations enjoy certain tax advantages, but not all share the same advantages.

      The Roman Catholics don't get free roads any more than the local museum gets free roads. And when the local synagogue gets its parking lot and driveway paved, it has to pay for it from its own pockets.

      I rather think that you are quite ignorant about the nature of non-profits.

    39. Re:With the current administration... by fyngyrz · · Score: 1
      I am not ignorant about non-profits. I may have been ignorant about roads, though. I used roads because I assumed they were paid from the general pocket book. If not, fine. We'll talk about military defense, then. Or printing money. Or whatever it is that my taxes go for. Churches don't pay their share, so everyone else has to pay it for them, but they get as much use of the resources, whatever they are, as the rest of us do. If I am protected by the armed forces, then so are they. They get to use money just like I do. I pay, they don't. Or repairing the pentagon after whatever happened on 9/11, happened. Or whatever example you'd prefer to use.

      The point is, if I have to pay taxes, then they should have to pay taxes too, because - here it comes - I am completley, utterly, unwilling to pay for churches. The constitution seems to be pretty clear about whether I should pay - the answer is no.

      To quote Thomas Jefferson:

      "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical..."

      Have at me, varlet. :)

      There, balls in your court.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    40. Re:With the current administration... by fyngyrz · · Score: 1
      don't pretend that only the religious [non-profit organizations] don't pay taxes

      I don't make any such pretense. What I am saying is that I am unwilling to pay taxes (or anything else) specifically to support religious organizations. This has nothing to do with other organizations. I'm specifically talking about religion, and not excluding other non-profits from my objections by accident, even though they too benefit from the stolen sweat of my brow; religion is different.

      I have the same Thomas Jefferson quote for you that I replied to the other poster with, I really can't say it any better, except perhaps to replace "man" with "person":

      "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical..."

      Now, if you want to make a pet shelter tax free, I'm all for it. If you want to make a battered woman's shelter tax free, I'm all for that, too. I will happily pull my share, and my share of their share, and never, ever complain. If you want to build a drug rehab program and make it tax free, I do not agree that this is a good use of money, but I will pull for the general social good in hopes that I am wrong.

      Religion, though... I have high confidence that religion is inherently harmful bunk from alpha to omega, and I am utterly against doing anything proactive to support it. The government forces me to; I roundly object. Religion is not only a parasite in my view, it is a harmful parasite. It can exist in the wild, sucking off hosts who for whatever reason do not mind, and I won't have a sudden urge to try to make it extinct - but I am apalled at the idea that it lives off sucking my blood and my family's blood. That makes me want to kill it, to push the metaphor a little harder.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    41. Re:With the current administration... by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 1
      The point is that every organisation is treated the same. To make Catholic and Hindu organisations pay taxes while exempting atheist organisations would be discriminatory. You're not paying to support non-profits--their members do that. Part of the idea is that their members have already paid for the military, for the police, for the courts, for the state, and since the organisations do not generate any profit, they are not generating anything to be taxed. A non-profit is, in a sense, a legal non-entity, or in another sense it's really just an incorporation of its members. We don't pay for the animal shelter, or a church, or a drug rehab centre: we pay for ourselves, and some of us choose to pay for those things.

      Note that a priest who lives in a rectory must pay taxes on the housing benefit he receives thereby. It's not a free ride.

      As for your anti-religious bent, just remember that it was religion which freed the slaves; it was religion which gave women the vote; it was religion which argued against socialism of the Nazi and Communist variety. More people have been killed by atheism than by religion (Mao, Stalin, Hitler and Pol Pot manage to dwarf every other lunacy of history).

    42. Re:With the current administration... by fyngyrz · · Score: 1
      The point is that every organisation is treated the same. To make Catholic and Hindu organisations pay taxes while exempting atheist organisations would be discriminatory.

      No, the point is that every religious organization does not have to pay the taxes that my "organization" has to pay, and therefore I am paying for them. I am not saying that atheist organizations should be exempt, I am arguing that no operation that deals with religion on any level with religion should be exempt for that reason. An animal shelter isn't "an atheist organization", for crying out loud! You are forcing me to pay for religion, none of which I would support if not forced to do so by the government, and that is flat out wrong.

      ...since the organisations do not generate any profit, they are not generating anything to be taxed

      This is utter nonsense. These organizations generate huge amounts of profit. Go look around inside a Catholic or Episcopalian church. Or just look at the outside of one, for that matter. It never ceases to amaze me how blind people can be. Non-profit? Hardly.

      As for your anti-religious bent, just remember that it was religion which freed the slaves; it was religion which gave women the vote; it was religion which argued against socialism of the Nazi and Communist variety. More people have been killed by atheism than by religion (Mao, Stalin, Hitler and Pol Pot manage to dwarf every other lunacy of history).

      Even if I accepted these positions - and I most certainly do not, some of them are downright absurd - I would also remember the crusades, the witch burnings, 900+ years of religious inquisitions, torture, ostracism, sexual repression, the active and destructive antipathy to science and those doing science, today's utter stupidity about birth control as evidenced by many religious sects, the Muslims who flew into the twin towers, those who are today beheading innocents and kidnapping aid workers, the bombings in Northern Ireland, the destruction of ancient statues by the Taliban, and the self-centered hatred of every Christian congregation that chants that they are "saved" and no one else is.

      But the thing is, none of this is relevant; the issue is, I'm being forced to carry the load for religious operations, and I object. I have a right to object, and I am correct to object, and the government is wrong to make me pay for these ideas which I do not support.

      One last tip: While we can directly attribute the evil done in the crusades, witch burnings, inquisitions, 9/11, etc. to religion we cannot attribute the evil done by Mao, Stalin, and Hitler (who was quite religious) to atheism. They all had agendas that are entirely separate from religion. Stalin wasn't killing people because he disagreed with their religion. He was killing them for a myriad of other reasons, none of which were good, but few of which had anything to do with religion except perhaps as an excuse. I don't know about Pol Pot. The rest are terrible examples, they don't make your case at all.

      Atheism is merly the lack of a belief in a god or gods. It doesn't contain any motiviational material to make one go out and kill, rape and/or pillage. In this way, it is very unlike religion.

      Please feel free to have the last word if you like. I'm done here.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    43. Re:With the current administration... by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 1
      No, the point is that every religious organization does not have to pay the taxes that my "organization" has to pay, and therefore I am paying for them.

      What, exactly, does the religious organisation demand which was not already paid for by its members? They already paid for their share of the military; they already paid for their share of the police; they already paid for their share of everything, just as you already paid for your share of everything. I don't see any additional burden being placed on the state due to the existence of non-profits (save for tracking them, and that's what their registration fees cover).

      You're not paying a single penny for them.

      This is utter nonsense. These organizations generate huge amounts of profit.

      No--if they were for-profit, they would not be exempt from corporate taxation. That's the whole point of non-profit corporations, after all: that it doesn't make sense to treat a political party, a church or an animal shelter the same way as a car manufacturer.

      Go look around inside a Catholic or Episcopalian church.

      Ah, as I thought: you're economically as well as legally ignorant. That's not profit. A business deducts from its revenues its expenses (like buildings); a church-building is an expense, albeit an attractive one.

      But the thing is, none of this is relevant; the issue is, I'm being forced to carry the load for religious operations, and I object. I have a right to object, and I am correct to object, and the government is wrong to make me pay for these ideas which I do not support.

      Do you object to the fact that political parties are considered non-profits? After all, there are a good number of those which you disagree with.

      You're not carrying the load for religious organisations. You're not carrying the load for religious organisations. You're not carrying the load for religious organisations. Their members pay for them and carry that load. If tomorrow there were no more religious non-profits, the expense of government would be no less (rather more, probably).

      And your hatred for religion is relevant, because it is blinding you to the truth that religious organisations aren't burdening you a bit. You're so full of hate and loathing that you refuse to accept what is plainly obvious.

      BTW, witch burnings were not religiously motivated. The trials were civil trials of those accused of harming others, exactly like trying someone for poisoning or shooting. The state of scientific knowledge of the day was such that witchcraft was believed to exist (and in fact, witchcraft trials were an outgrowth of the early scientific era: the Roman Church had outlawed such trials).

  15. zerg by Lord+Omlette · · Score: 5, Funny

    If someone gave me money to study "psychic teleportation", I'd be like "Thank you, Allah!" and immediately begin researching liquor and hookers.

    "Guys, you're not gonna believe this! Last night, I as at this strip club, I closed my eyes and when I opened them, I was face down in the gutter a few blocks away!"

    --
    [o]_O
  16. Stephen King's short story about teleportation by WilliamsDA · · Score: 3, Informative

    Stephen King wrote a nice short story about teleportation called The Jaunt. I'm not much of a King fan, but the story is very good. In The Jaunt people can teleport between different locations, but they have to be put to sleep first, otherwise something very bad happens. Most of the story is from the perspective of a father telling his family, all of whom are about to go "Jaunting", about the history of how it was invented and its side effects. Very interesting read.

    1. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by Russ+Steffen · · Score: 2, Informative

      That sounds a lot like Alfred Bester's "The Stars My Destination" (originaly published as 'Tiger! Tiger!'). Even the term 'jaunting' is used the same way.

    2. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by MisterClever · · Score: 1
      I haven't read my "Physics of Star Trek Book" in a few years, but IIRC this is how you'd build a real 'people teleporter:'

      1) Scan you down to the atomic level

      2) Transmit the billions of petabytes of data to the receiving station

      3) Rebuild you from the atomic level-up from the transmitted data

      4) Confirm you'd been built correctly

      5) Vaporize or otherwise annihilate the source person

      Apparently it was step 5 that might be contentious.

    3. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by CAIMLAS · · Score: 2, Informative

      Don't waste your time on Stephen King's short story. I suspect he culled most of his information from The Stars, My Destination, written by Alfred Bester sometime before 1977. It's much more than just a story about jaunting (his term, afaik), it's a story that involves jaunting with a rich science fiction scenery, good characters and development, plot, and rich background. It might be considered steam punk to a degree by some.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    4. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't know if you've heard of it, but _The Stars My Destination_ (alternative title: _Tiger, Tiger_) by Alfred Bester, also uses teleportation very successfully as a theme and plot element. If I recall, it was also called "jaunting" in that book. It probably played some part in inspiring S. K.'s story. (Nothing against the man - but _Stars_ was written in the 1950's, and considered a classic of science fiction and even literature. There's nothing wrong with borrowing from the best.)

    5. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by cmdr_beeftaco · · Score: 1

      I thought Stephen King was dead. Passed away of a heart attack or something, I remember hearing it on the radio.

    6. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by braintartare · · Score: 1

      Good grief, King ripped off Alfred Bester's use of the term "jaunt"??? I guess he figured nobody else read "The Stars My Destination"?? Gully Foyle rolls in his grave

    7. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hit by a van.

      His subsequent experience with the medical community inspired him to remake Lars von Trier's "Riget" as "Kingdom Hospital" for ABC which effectively cancelled the mini-series halfway through (I think they dumped the remaining episodes on the air one lazy weekend in the Summer).

    8. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by mefus · · Score: 1

      Gully Foyle is my name
      Terra is my nation
      Deep space is my dwelling place
      The stars my destination.

      --
      mefus
      In Open Society, GPL Software frees YOU!
    9. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by Gentlewhisper · · Score: 1

      How about we insert one more instruction?

      1) Scan you down to the atomic level

      2) Transmit the billions of petabytes of data to the receiving station

      if (!person.name.equals("George W Bush")) {
      3) Rebuild you from the atomic level-up from the transmitted data

      4) Confirm you'd been built correctly
      }


      5) Vaporize or otherwise annihilate the source person

    10. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Tiger! Tiger!" rang a bell. I've got the collection of short stories that includes "The Jaunt" at home. King might have a reference in there to the other work.

    11. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by Xikteny · · Score: 2, Informative

      To all the people saying that King stole ideas from A. Bester, if you'd actually read the story, you'd know that in the story, it says that it's called jaunting because the scientist who invented it read The Stars My Destination.

    12. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. For god's sake, they showed him in the stands at all the Red Sox games during the finals and world series recently. He is very much alive. Troll.

    13. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given the avalanche of postings crying out that Stephen King _copied_ the phrase, I feel compelled to point out that the short story pays full dues to `The Stars, My Destination', and really, only the term `jaunting' wrt teleportation is borrowed from Bester's book. The hook of the short story is entirely unrelated to anything writted by Bester, and is very interesting.

    14. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

      And Tiger! Tiger! sounds a lot like a poem by William Blake from whom Bester borrowed the meter for "Gully foyle is my name..." I don't really know King's work except for the movies but I can't imagine he borrowed this stuff without in some way paying respects to Bester. I should hope so anyway; Bester's was a great book, many people see it as foundational reading for understanding the "cyberpunk" sci fi of a few decades later.

    15. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by pipingguy · · Score: 1


      In The Jaunt people can teleport between different locations, but they have to be put to sleep first, otherwise something very bad happens

      Did you read the post that is/was right above yours?

      Quote: "Last night, I as at this strip club, I closed my eyes and when I opened them, I was face down in the gutter a few blocks away!"

    16. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aha! A classic mistake!

      Everyone knows that the key to successful teleportation is that you don't move!
      You stay in one spot - you just move the Universe instead.

      (I know... It's very "There is no spoon". Look for Keanu Reeves as Nobel Physics Prize 2023.)

    17. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by ThousandStars · · Score: 1

      Also note that it's named Tiger Tiger in Britain. Not sure about the rest of the world, though.

    18. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by ThousandStars · · Score: 1

      As I noted above in response to another highly-moderated comment, the book is also known as Tiger Tiger in Britain. Not sure about the rest of the world, though.

    19. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      It might be considered steam punk to a degree by some.

      By who exactly? The illiterate?

    20. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ugh! You have a billion dollar high tech system and you rely on name? DNA, my friend, that is where the future lies.

    21. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the question is, is atom arrangements in the brain equals to a person's personality? Somehow I don't think so. I think electrical impulses among other things also governs how you think and how you store your memory. Can you get them to be identical to the source when you build your target from ground up? Remember, sometimes, even electronics behave differently when powered at different times.

    22. Re:Stephen King's short story about teleportation by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      It was also called jaunting in the original series of The Tomorrow People, a UK series that was also shown on Nickelodeon in its early years, except you were conscious. They also had it that telepaths passed through hyperspace when they jaunt, and you could get stuck there, and losing consciousness is akin to the danger of falling asleep in the snow.

      The series is available on DVD from amazon.co.uk, they will ship to the US, and they're region free.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  17. Co-incidental QOTD by og_sh0x · · Score: 0

    ...And just when I clicked on the "Read More..." link, the QOTD at the bottom said: "You cannot achieve the impossible without attempting the absurd. "

    1. Re:Co-incidental QOTD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't need to click the link, I clicked it... with my mind!!!!!

  18. quick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    someone transport me some mod points...

  19. Hey, if they want to waste money... by jd · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I'd be more than happy to conduct research into anti-gravity, photon torpedos, inertia damping systems, faster-than-light warp drives....


    Just pay me a few million, and I'll do whatever research into fantasy physics that they want. I'll even throw in a few Powerpoint presentations for good measure.


    If the choice is between spending billions on reserching quackery in the military, or spending the same money on bringing US education up to decent levels, I think the education would be money better spent. We might even end up with politicians who know the difference between Sweden and Switzerland.


    But if they're determined to throw money away on absurdity, then the least they can do is throw some of it in my direction. I think I could find better uses for it than anyone the USAF could hire from the Psychic Hotline.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by Halthar · · Score: 1

      Inertia damping? Is that anything like a big ole ghetto booty?

    2. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please for the love of everything sacred, quit watching star trek for a few hours a day. You might get a girlfriend....

    3. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by TheRealFixer · · Score: 2, Funny

      We might even end up with politicians who know the difference between Sweden and Switzerland.

      Hey, I can't fault that mistake. They probably got their information off of the Internets.

    4. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by killjoe · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Think of it this way. Every million spent on quackery is one less million to spend on bombs. Of course without enough bombs we can't make the people of falujah obey allawi but that's another discussion altogether.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    5. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by jd · · Score: 1

      Girlfriend... girlfriend... girlfriend... Nope, can't find that entry in either the Klingon dictionary or the Jargon File. You sure that's not a made-up word?

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    6. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by RobertKozak · · Score: 1

      We might even end up with politicians who know the difference between Sweden and Switzerland.

      There is a difference?

      --
      Bet this .sig looks familiar.
    7. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by ThreeE · · Score: 0

      Drat. You beat me to it.

    8. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by jd · · Score: 1

      Swiss chocolate is vastly superior.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    9. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by AvantLegion · · Score: 1
      the choice is between spending billions on reserching quackery in the military, or spending the same money on bringing US education up to decent levels, I think the education would be money better spent

      You're making the assumption that dumping more money into education will solve anything.

      You can pour as much beer into a barrel full of holes that you want. It's still not going to get you anywhere.

      One thing that must die is the notion that public education just needs more money dumped in. We do that every political cycle, and test scores and other metrics show no progress. Why does anyone honestly think the NEXT money dump will make all the difference?

    10. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by commodoresloat · · Score: 1
      I think the education would be money better spent. We might even end up with politicians who know the difference between Sweden and Switzerland.

      I'll settle for politicians who know enough science to undrerstand that spending millions on teleportation is ludicrous.

      Sadly, this isn't the US government's first foray into "psychic warfare"; I remember in the 80's reading about the pentagon funding a scheme to learn about time travel so that we could deal with ballistic missiles by sending them off to explode harmlessly in the past. It IS funny, but I wish I were joking.

    11. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "I'd be more than happy to conduct research into... photon torpedos"

      That's easy. So long as Somebody Else is paying for it, all you need is the antimatter. As for its ability to maintain its own warp field when fired while in warp, how the heck are they going to proove that your photono torpedo won't do it? :)

    12. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Newsflash: there are females that actually enjoy watching star trek. I know at least three. My GF, one of my old collegues from school and my own mother.

      In other news, it has been reported that boys and girls do not, I repeat, do NOT have to share each and every activity, state of mind and likeness to be attracted to each other.

      If you allow girls to dictate your lifestyle, your personality and your favorite pasttimes, you are surely not any more attractive than a puppy. Uncondition adaption and surrender to female will and whim is NOT manly and whatever some girls tell you, once they attain that state in a male, they don't find him "manly" enough and leave him.

      A man should be able to give up some hobby and a part of himself for the sake of his girl and their potential family (that's what the genes tell our females) - but if he's ready to give up all his opinions, he can't be an alpha male, right? And it's alpha males that every female is genetically attracted to.

    13. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I seem to recall that photon torpedo's were actually matter/antimatter bombs, from my recollection of the "startrek physiscs". In which case, I recall seeing something, I think here on slashdot, about the military looking at anti-matter for weapons research.

      So, yes, maybe they are looking at "photon torpedos" in a sense. Since we can actually provably create anti-protons and the like, it just might not quite so far-fetched as "psychokinetic teleportation".

      Look, I have a lot less problem with the government funding $100K for some physicist to 'investigate' anti-gravity or some such thing, than I do with spending a couple hundred Million on a ballistic missile defense, when we probably stand a far greater chance of having a terrorist ship a nuke to us via one of our uninspected cargo containers that a fraction of that couple hundred Mil might help us inspect.

    14. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by Xyrus · · Score: 1

      All of those may be possible, except for photon torpedos (what kind of damage would that cause). Proton torpedos would pack quite a kick, along matter-antimatter bombs.

      Anti-gravity: Reversing or lessening the curvature of space time in a local area. Might take a bit of energy or at least a much butter understanding of gravity.

      Inertial Damping System: Same as above.

      Warp Drives: Same as above. By removing the curvature of space-time around the craft, to the universe you don't seem to exist. The space-time drag effect goes away and THEORETICALLY go as fast as you wanted to. You'd need a LOT of energy to do this, as well as complete understanding of space-time.

      ATM though it would all be fantasy, as we don't even have a common theory for all the forces in the Universe. :)

      As far as "psychics" go though, I have a problem even formulating how they could exist. To see the future, you would have to calculat all events in the entire universe for some future point. Even on a local scale it would be impossible due to the uncertainty principle.

      Psychic teleportation?????

      I'm George W. Bush, and I approve this research.

      ~X~
      "I'll need 10 million dollars to research the potential for using playboy bunnies as a mind control devince on men."

      --
      ~X~
    15. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by magefile · · Score: 1

      We might even end up with politicians who know the difference between Sweden and Switzerland.

      Or that Wales is a country, not a city in the US.

    16. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by jd · · Score: 1
      Apparently, the same guys involved in the psychic time-travel and psychic healing stuff for the US military are the very same as the "Military Intelligence" involved in torture/abuse claims in Abu Ghareb, Afghanistan, Guantamalo Bay, etc.


      My guess would be that they can file for a bigger cut of the "black budget" with psychic teleportation than they can with their nudie pics.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    17. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

      Are you just speculating or is there evidence that these are the same guys? That definitely would be interesting....

    18. Re:Hey, if they want to waste money... by jd · · Score: 1

      The Men Who Stare At Goats is a book detailing interrogation techniques based on psychic warfare. There's another extract from the series. I can't find the first part, which gets heavily into the psychic stuff.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  20. well Ronald Reagan did Star Wars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Not to be outdone, someone else decided to approve a Star Trek Project. What next - someone's going to try to build Hal 9000 to decide who is placed on the do-not fly list?

    1. Re:well Ronald Reagan did Star Wars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they already have a magic 8-ball for that

  21. Insulting... by bloggins02 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Star Trek fans may be happy to hear that the Air Force has paid to study psychic teleportation [...]

    Please, this is an insult to Star Trek fans everywhere. The Star Trek vision, if anything, was about using science and technology to enhance people's lives. It was and is in no way about this pseudo-scientific nonsense. (BTW, "pseudo" in this context means "false, but masquerading as", NOT, "kinda" or "quasi".)

    If anything, Star Trek fans would (and should) be appalled by this.


    End of rant.

    1. Re:Insulting... by meringuoid · · Score: 3, Funny
      Please, this is an insult to Star Trek fans everywhere. The Star Trek vision, if anything, was about using science and technology to enhance people's lives. It was and is in no way about this pseudo-scientific nonsense.

      Which is why about half the aliens they encounter are telepathic, psychic, equipped with ESP, able to transition into pure energy, or have telekinetic powers. And that was before the bloody Pah-wraiths which turned the end of Deep Space Nine into something resembling Buffy the Vampire Slayer...

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    2. Re:Insulting... by agent+dero · · Score: 1

      pssst, you know Star Trek is fake....right?


      I think it's quite applicable then ;)

      --
      Error 407 - No creative sig found
    3. Re:Insulting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Prime Directive prevents me from cooking you to a cinder with a overwhelming flame.

      Picard out.

    4. Re:Insulting... by Mard · · Score: 1

      Please, this is an insult to Star Trek fans everywhere.

      That's okay, I've heard they're used to it.

      --
      DRM = Digitally Restricted Media. This is a viral sig, pass it on.
    5. Re:Insulting... by Magickcat · · Score: 1

      Betazoid, Vulcan psychic mind powers... yeah, Star Trek is 100% science. Perhaps you should take a peek at the authorised novel "Spock's World" - the whole premise of Vulcan psionics is mystically based, and it adds tremendously to the ideas around Vulcan mentality.

      I'll spare you the J.B. Rhine and Quantum Physics arguments, but being a Celt, I've experienced psychic phenomena myself. It might very well be some sort of physical phenomena occuring solely in my brain, but it certainly looks like it's genuine phenomena. I've experienced telepathy for instance, where I've literally heard my father's thoughts in my own mind.

      I expect that one day that psionics will be a real science, when our understanding is sufficient enough. Until then however, I think it's best to be generally sceptical but not to completely exclude the posibility and do some genuinely scientific investigation from time to time.

      --

      Si tacuisses philosophus mansisses. If you had kept quiet, you would have remained a philosopher.

    6. Re:Insulting... by students · · Score: 1

      Spock's World is completely incompatable with "Star Trek: Fisrt Contact". Hence, it is not part of the series. Not that it isn't worth reading.

    7. Re:Insulting... by anagama · · Score: 2, Insightful

      • If anything, Star Trek fans would (and should) be appalled by this.

      My sentiments exactly. I'm a bit taken aback by the negative comments you got on this. I think Trek fans are probably bothered when ST deviates from a hard sci-fi stance. But, I think even when ST deviates into new-agey garbage, there is still a basis to say it isn't magic, just a technology humans don't yet understand. For example - worm hole aliens = Bajor's gods. I placate myself with Clark's "any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" (or something close to that) statement (gosh - hope I got attribution right as well).

      The difference between ST and X-Files for example, is that ST presumes there is an explanation for things, even if it is one we don't yet know or can't understand. Fantasy (like X-Files or whatnot) - deals only with mysticism and paranoia. Star Trek hasn't always avoided that, but it sure is better than most.

      The reference to ST fans is offensive to the fans, most of whom, I presume, have a soft spot for hard sci-fi - even if ST fails to be hard sci-fi all the time, that says nothing about the fans' preferences for stories rooted in non-mystical plots.
      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    8. Re:Insulting... by mefus · · Score: 1

      The Star Trek vision, if anything, was about using science and technology to enhance people's lives.

      Scottie's been smoking the dilithium crystal again.

      --
      mefus
      In Open Society, GPL Software frees YOU!
    9. Re:Insulting... by Skavookie · · Score: 1

      Well now you're insulting Joss Whedon's fans!

    10. Re:Insulting... by Zangief · · Score: 1

      Which is why about half the aliens they encounter are telepathic, psychic, equipped with ESP, able to transition into pure energy, or have telekinetic powers. And that was before the bloody Pah-wraiths which turned the end of Deep Space Nine into something resembling Buffy the Vampire Slayer...

      And the other half are hot girls, ready to teleport into the pants of captain kirk!!

    11. Re:Insulting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... you're still a nerd.

    12. Re:Insulting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Translation:

      "I have no girlfriend."

    13. Re:Insulting... by Magickcat · · Score: 1

      In my book, ST:First Contact doesn't take precedence over Spock's World, but hey, continuity isn't wonderful with Trek anyhow, even from episode to episode.

      I personally cringe every time they start the time travel twist, because it's always a continuity disaster. It's a real shame that Trek writers don't know their own Trek universe enough to get things right. It's also sad that they always seem to veer away from the cool timeline events like the Eugenics war etc - who needs Zafram compared to KAAAHHHHNNN!

      Personally, I'd love to see more on the Vulcans barbaric past too - now that would be good. Even some of the psionic ancient Vulcans in the Federation timeline would be good - smashing things up Akira style and killing people just with mind power - now that would be like the good old days of Star Trek.

      Instead, we'll probably just get more reversing the polarity from the forward emitter array type stories.

      --

      Si tacuisses philosophus mansisses. If you had kept quiet, you would have remained a philosopher.

    14. Re:Insulting... by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 1

      well said

    15. Re:Insulting... by Colonel+Cholling · · Score: 1

      but being a Celt, I've experienced psychic phenomena myself.

      This is one of the more ridiculous statements I've seen on slashdot, which is no small feat. You mean that all decendants of the indigenous inhabitants of the British Isles experience psychic phenomena? My grandmother was Irish. I must not have inherited her Celtic mutant gene, though, because I haven't had any psychic experiences.

      Just more of this neo-pagan "all Celts are these wise spiritual mystic Stevie Nicks types" bullshit.

      --

      I am Sartre of the Borg. Existence is futile.
    16. Re:Insulting... by Magickcat · · Score: 1


      This is one of the more ridiculous statements I've seen on slashdot, which is no small feat. You mean that all decendants of the indigenous inhabitants of the British Isles experience psychic phenomena?


      The fact that you need me to qualify my statement shows to me that you obviously want to jump to conclusions. The Celts are not in fact the indigenous inhabitants of the British Isles, they travelled there and intermarried with the indigenous population. Those indigenous non-Celts are said in Irish folklore to have the psychic power, and for the ability to be passed in blodlines.

      My grandmother was Irish. I must not have inherited her Celtic mutant gene, though, because I haven't had any psychic experiences.

      I didn't say that your grandmother did or does have psychic experiences. However, a fair proportion of Celtic people do indeed claim to experience psychic phenomena. I'm not stating that this is an actual genuine event, but I am claiming that people such as myself who are Celts often experience such things. Your arguement has logic flaws, it's the common:

      1. My apple is green,
      2. Therefore all apples are green.


      Just more of this neo-pagan "all Celts are these wise spiritual mystic Stevie Nicks types" bullshit.

      Quite often, I find that people who need to resort to swearing or mockery to make a point are far to ignorant to bother replying to. Nonethless, I'll attempt a reply in an attempt to educate you. Celtic mythology and stories of Celtic psychic ability are older than the American and British Empire. Considering Stevie Nicks is an overrated performer from the 1970's, I imagine she's not quite as old. If you're interested, which I imagine you are not, you can read about W.B. Yeats, the mystic, poet and a member of the Golden Dawn, or perhaps about the Druids in Ireland, or perhaps discover why Ireland is called "the haunted Isle".

      Oh, and if I had a dollar for every person who claimed to be an authority on the Celts because of their Irish grandmother, I'd be rich. If you know nothing of the Celt history, are not a Celt yourself, and if you're only claim is your long dead grandmother, kindly keep your mininformed opinions to your self.

      --

      Si tacuisses philosophus mansisses. If you had kept quiet, you would have remained a philosopher.

    17. Re:Insulting... by Colonel+Cholling · · Score: 1

      Those indigenous non-Celts are said in Irish folklore to have the psychic power, and for the ability to be passed in blodlines.

      Since when does "said in Irish folklore" constitute any kind of reliable evidence?

      Your arguement has logic flaws, it's the common: 1. My apple is green, 2. Therefore all apples are green.

      You said, quote, "being a Celt, I've experienced psychic phenomena myself." What you're saying is that the fact that you're a Celt implies that you would experience psychic phenomena. And I was giving a counter-example.

      Celtic mythology and stories of Celtic psychic ability are older than the American and British Empire.

      Belief in a flat Earth is older than the Egyptians. It still doesn't make it true.

      you can read about W.B. Yeats, the mystic, poet and a member of the Golden Dawn

      I have. Just because a bunch of upper-class Victorian lunatics decided to sit around and cobble together some mystical system from a bunch of apocryphal texts and engage in ridiculous ceremonies doesn't mean they were psychic.

      or perhaps about the Druids in Ireland

      I know a lot of New Age types like to claim the Druids had amazing supernatural powers, but the evidence is wanting.

      --

      I am Sartre of the Borg. Existence is futile.
    18. Re:Insulting... by Magickcat · · Score: 1

      Since when does "said in Irish folklore" constitute any kind of reliable evidence?

      I would imagine that like most forms of history, it has some truth and much fiction.

      You said, quote, "being a Celt, I've experienced psychic phenomena myself." What you're saying is that the fact that you're a Celt implies that you would experience psychic phenomena. And I was giving a counter-example.

      Actually no, you were merely attemting the reductio ad absurdum. . The fact that I am a Celt means that I am more likely to claim that I have experienced psychic experiences, it has nothing to do with it being a mandatory to all Celts all people of distant Celtic relations like yourself. Throughout history, (and I should add that the Celtic people preserved a great deal of it), Celtic people have had a very strong experience of supernatural phenomena, more so than many modern cultures to my mind.

      Belief in a flat Earth is older than the Egyptians. It still doesn't make it true.

      I have said that the experience occurs subjectively, I can't really say that psychic phenomena is necessarily true. I have said however, that the experience of it is true. It's a subtle point, but one that I've pointed out sufficiently in this discussion. For me, I have indeed experienced it, whether or not it is emperically true, I can't say, but subjectively I know it to have occured. The Earth is indeed a sphere, and yet we wear flat soled shoes.

      Just because a bunch of upper-class Victorian lunatics decided to sit around and cobble together some mystical system from a bunch of apocryphal texts and engage in ridiculous ceremonies doesn't mean they were psychic.

      I agree that it doesn't mean that they were psychic, but it does show that they were inclined to believe that they themselves were experiencing psychism.

      I know a lot of New Age types like to claim the Druids had amazing supernatural powers, but the evidence is wanting.

      As do I and they also are quite lacking, and of course it's very likely wishful thinking, but it is indeed a psychological phenomenon. I can't deny my own experience regardless of your particular beliefs.

      --

      Si tacuisses philosophus mansisses. If you had kept quiet, you would have remained a philosopher.

  22. Coverup by Kyn · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is just the cover story. The money is really being funneled into the Stargate program.

    1. Re:Coverup by Mattintosh · · Score: 0

      I was just thinking the same thing...

      Of course, that wouldn't be "psychic" teleportation, but instead, a supremely unlikely stable wormhole established between two rings made of a supremely unlikely type of metallic stone inscribed with odd-looking symbols that vaguely represent imaginary pictures in the sky as viewed by people on Earth.

      Oh wait...

      By the way, did it set off anyone else's BS Meter when they first showed that all the stargates had the same symbol set, despite massive positional changes from planet to planet that would affect the "shape" of constellations? Or am I just too nerdy to live?

    2. Re:Coverup by FooAtWFU · · Score: 1

      Careful, you'll end up shipped to the Alpha Site like the guy in tonight's Stargate episode.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
    3. Re:Coverup by Kyn · · Score: 1

      Yeah. And isn't it odd that almost everyone speaks English? What's up with that?

    4. Re:Coverup by pfriedma · · Score: 1

      Yea... ever since the X303 incident and Anubis's attack, they've had to get more creative.

      --
      Mak'tal shree lok'tak mek'ta sa'tak Oz! - Daniel Jackson
    5. Re:Coverup by StarKruzr · · Score: 1

      Actually, what bothered me was that there were clearly MANY more locations to gate to than the number of symbols on the gates, and since the the 7th chevron is always the point of origin...

      --

      +++ATH0
    6. Re:Coverup by yossarian+dent · · Score: 1

      You know he actually mentions a "true stargate" in the pdf? The only things missing are an infinite improbability drive and speculation on the human ability to internally produce heavy water (though I haven't read the whole thing; maybe I should look before I speak).

      --
      sig not ready: (A)bort, (R)etry, (F)ail.
    7. Re:Coverup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 7th symbol is unique to each planet's stargate and depicts a unique star formation surrounding that planet. Or something.

    8. Re:Coverup by StarKruzr · · Score: 1

      Which means that you can't get to some gates from other gates, right? Unless it's always the same symbol on the ring displaced.

      --

      +++ATH0
  23. My 2 cents... by John+Seminal · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Who knows what government already knows that the public, and even scientists in universities, do not know. For all we know, there was a UFO that crashed and the government has discovered alien technologies. There seems to have been an exponential growth in technology. Where did it all come from?

    What proof do I have? Just look at Sam Cassel.

    --

    Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."

    1. Re:My 2 cents... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's why we have an exponential gowth in technology. Technology we have can be used to make new technology. The more technology we have the faster we get more technology. Functions where dx/dt is dependent on x are exponential functions. It's a positive feedback loop

    2. Re:My 2 cents... by dwbryson · · Score: 2, Funny

      You mean this Sam Cassel ?

      If that isn't evidence of UFO's I don't know what is.

      --
      - "Never let a computer tell me shit." - DelTron Zero
    3. Re:My 2 cents... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yikes! He's limbo dancing vertically. No human could possibly do that.

  24. technology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the military dosent put money into this kinds of stuff then who will. Its never wasteful to attempt the almost impossible.

  25. Watch out when your sleeping tonight by glrotate · · Score: 3, Funny

    Maj. Ed Dames' astral body may come kick you in the nuts.

    1. Re:Watch out when your sleeping tonight by BWJones · · Score: 3, Funny

      Maj. Ed Dames' astral body may come kick you in the nuts.

      Then he would have to worry about my corporal body kicking back. :-)

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    2. Re:Watch out when your sleeping tonight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Troll? No this should be modded as funny! Astral......Corporal...... Get it? See the humor? Ah, well. Back in my day, moderators were just a bit more clever.

    3. Re:Watch out when your sleeping tonight by NardofDoom · · Score: 1

      Majors outrank corporals, corporal.

      --
      You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
    4. Re:Watch out when your sleeping tonight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Just out of curiousity, when was your day? (The reason I ask is because I've owned several days, the most recent being June 3, 2004. I've never found them to be much use, despite what the guy on the street corner who sold them to me said.)

  26. Spend Spend Spend!!! by gr8images · · Score: 1

    This is cool. Who cares about the budget that much anyways? It'll all go back to the people (some of us) anyways... maybe we'll learn something

    1. Re:Spend Spend Spend!!! by vaderhelmet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You have to remember though, that the government _does_ tax us. Significant wasteful spending, while temporarily boosting the money of a few, will eventually be distributed into the taxes of the many. In situations like this the pros and cons need to be evaluated... Anyone thinking with their head on straight would see that wasteful science is bad science.

  27. cover story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is probably just a cover justification. They are most likely using the money to study supersecret airplanes and such and needed a cover story. They just let the USAF spin doctors at it just to have some fun.

  28. Really... by Spytap · · Score: 1

    And we're in a deficit? Go figure...

    1. Re:Really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're in deficit because your country holds the world's currency's printing press and won't stop using it.

  29. RTFA!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Air Force did NOT pay to study this. They commissioned a study and one of the recommendations was this, and they have already stated it will not be funded. Hurray for illiteracy!

    1. Re:RTFA!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RTFA!!!!

      You must be new here.

  30. It's a joke by ajs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Has to be a joke. Read the PDF. The name of the sub-contractor is "Warp Drive" and the end of the document contains discussions of "negative energy" and all kinds of totally bogus junk that looks like it was culled from a Star Trek script.

    Seriously, this is some fan-boy trying to rile up the millitary conspiracy theorists (and apparently doing quite well).

    Until the DoD comes out and says, "yes, this is ours and we published it in all seriousness," please stop believing everything you read on the Internet.

    1. Re:It's a joke by supabeast! · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You've obviously never worked for the US Government as a contractor or employee. The government loves to request huge piles of documentation about all sorts of crazy things from contractors, who regularly just copy & paste from old documents, swap some names around, and replace the logos on the first page with logos of the relevant contractors and agencies. The thing is, much of this paperwork is huge, and these agencies have piles of the stuff printed and bound, on CD, on DVD, and on various government intranets -- so much of it that, in fact, nobody ever looks over it. So when silly nerds working on documentation get bored, they tend to stick some really stupid stuff in there, knowing damned well that nobody notices. It's just like the silly names that go into network protocols and such. Bored geeks looking for cheap thrills try to see what they can get away with.

      On a related note, I was once working on a very serious project where I named all of the client systems after food - chicken, pizza, and taco, and named the server Megadoomer after an Invader Zim episode. I just about died trying not to fall over laughing when my coworkers would turn red with embarassment when discussing the network during meetings because they thought the names were terribly silly. But it was government work, so nobody cared enough to make me change anything.

    2. Re:It's a joke by srleffler · · Score: 1

      Actually while this author appears to be full of shit, the stuff about negative energy is not completely bogus. I didn't read the PDF, but it sounds like he has culled stuff from the famous Alcubiere warp drive paper. This was a real, published, physics paper showing a theoretical solution of General Relativity allowing faster than light travel via a clever distortion of space-time without the need to resort to creating a wormhole. The author dubbed it a "warp drive" in homage to Star Trek. There's only one slight catch: the solution requires a huge quantity of "negative energy matter". We don't have any good reason to think that such matter exists. I don't think anybody believes this particular GR solution is physical, but the theory is not bogus.

    3. Re:It's a joke by mprinkey · · Score: 1

      Negative energy is also necessary to stabilize the opening of wormholes. I believe both are discussed, though I didn't spend a lot of time reading the .pdf. I do remember a modification of the Alcubiere approach that required a much smaller amount of negative energy, so in principle, this may be a limitation that can be engineered away. Of course, Casimir cavities are the only way that we currently have to reduce the vacuum energy. Not sure how that can be translated into a propulsion system.

      The bit of the report that I read is rather unimpressive. I only read the wormhole stuff...not the psychic stuff. But that certainly doesn't mean that this type of research is without merit. I think the issue increasing the speed of light in a Casimir cavities and the results issues that arise with regard to causality.

    4. Re:It's a joke by ajs · · Score: 1

      You've obviously never worked for the US Government as a contractor or employee.

      Contractor, yes. Employee, no. I've worked for the DoT (Volpe Center) and DoJ (INS, St. Albans) and done small amounts of sub-sub-contractor work for the DoD. The fact that you consider it obvious that I cannot have done this speaks to our differing experiences, which is to be expected, I guess, when you're talking about the nation's largest employer.

      when silly nerds working on documentation get bored, they tend to stick some really stupid stuff in there

      And hence, my statement: this is a joke. When the DoD says, "yes we published that in all seriousness," then get upset over wasted science dollars, until then I would ignore it as at best misinformation and at worst disgrunteled AF contractors trying to embarass the DoD.

    5. Re:It's a joke by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's only one slight catch: the solution requires a huge quantity of "negative energy matter". We don't have any good reason to think that such matter exists.

      Such situations (negative energy(mass)-density) can occur, but only in tiny, tiny regions, in quantum mechanical regimes. Macroscopic samples are unlikely to be forthcoming any time soon. ;)

      In the case of a wormhole (Schwarzchild throat), negative energy density is required, so that (light) rays that are converging as they enter the wormhole must be diverging as the leave the other end. Bending space-time in such a way that the rays diverge would be bending it in the opposite 'direction' to how it is bent by positive mass and energy, so it all hinges on the assumption that gravity is repulsive for negative mass-energies. I guess the situation with Alcubiere bubbles is similar.

  31. I think this should be encouraged... by meringuoid · · Score: 1

    ... because the more money the US military wastes on this kind of mumbo-jumbo, the safer the rest of the world will be. I'd far rather they have remote viewing specialists, psychic teleporters and experts in yogic flying than even more guns and bombs.

    --
    Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    1. Re:I think this should be encouraged... by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 1

      ... because the more money the US military wastes on this kind of mumbo-jumbo, the safer the rest of the world will be. I'd far rather they have remote viewing specialists, psychic teleporters and experts in yogic flying than even more guns and bombs.

      Bzzt... wrong answer. If the US military needs money, either taxes go up, meaning more americans go into poverty or into debt, or less is spent on educating america's youth. And if need be, the federal reserve just prints more money, devaluating the dollar and threatening the US economy. Nothing reassuring for the rest of the world really...

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    2. Re:I think this should be encouraged... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing reassuring for the rest of the world really...

      It is assuring alright... a busted tyrant beats a healthy tyrant!

  32. They could spend less money searching for... by IronChefMorimoto · · Score: 1

    This research could cost a lot less if they just did some searches on dudes in comas after car wrecks who wake up and save nurses' children from burning houses, only to learn their ex married someone else and feigned the bastard child off as the new guy's:

    http://www.usanetwork.com/series/thedeadzone/

    Johnny Smith could really help save some money here.

    IronChefMorimoto

  33. Why not? by cnelzie · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...of course it probably hasn't entered into anyone's mind here that the whole thing is a 'hoax' project designed to cover up whatever actual project they might be wanting to or actually are currently working on.

    No, I am not suggesting some kind of bizarre conspiracy, just some 'front project' to cover up something that may involve new laser assault/defense systems, sonic weaponry, or new methods of fighter control mechanisms or something that might be really cool, really plausible or equally 'cool' yet disturbingly vile that they would rather not explain to the American public or Congress.

    So, seeing that most of the nation, albiet only by a small fraction in the larger scheme of things, would fall for such crap, they decided to trot out that story. One, to be able to push it past such science-blind people as the majority of this nation and secondly to thumb their noses at the rest of us that would know and understand such a thing is bollox, yet are unfortunately unable to do anything significant about it...

    --
    If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
    1. Re:Why not? by cmdr_beeftaco · · Score: 4, Funny

      Or it could be they want us to think it is a hoax project because they are tantalizingly close to actually teleportation. It has been my experience that they only use these double-double-cover-ups when the project has some serious voodoo. But then again I could be wrong.

    2. Re:Why not? by SlayerDave · · Score: 1
      ...of course it probably hasn't entered into anyone's mind here that the whole thing is a 'hoax' project designed to cover up whatever actual project they might be wanting to or actually are currently working on.


      The problem with this idea is that you wouldn't want your cover story to draw attention to itself, as this clearly has. You'd have more success burying your black project under some innocuous, reasonable-sounding project name, not something ridiculous like psychic teleportation.

    3. Re:Why not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no way it is anything you suggest--this funding amount is _miniscule_ and would not pay for a week of any sort of serious military technological weaponry development. Look at budgets for other "really cool" weapons and you will see it takes orders of magnitude more money to do any sort of weapons development. You can't even buy a Taco Bell for $1 million these days.

    4. Re:Why not? by KarmaMB84 · · Score: 2, Funny

      This doesn't fool me, I know they just ripped the telepads out of one of them UFOs and are now intending to teleport into hell to bring back specimens.

    5. Re:Why not? by cmdr_beeftaco · · Score: 1
      That's what everyone thinks and that is why it never works. The Art of War makes a clear case for hiding where your enemy is most likely to be found and looking for enemy where they are most likely to not hide.

      You sir have a lot to learn about the black arts and deception.

    6. Re:Why not? by cmdr_beeftaco · · Score: 1

      Why do you consider a Taco Bell a weapon? I happen to like food there.

    7. Re:Why not? by dew4au · · Score: 0

      I work for the DoD; Navy projects in particular. I happen to agree with you that it could be possible. That's about as much as I can offer without being put to death. (Yes, I signed a contract stating that if I devulged sensitive info to any non-qualified third party I could be put to death.) Oh well, at least I have a job!

    8. Re:Why not? by moonbender · · Score: 1

      Yep... Something like deep space radar analysis in a base in Cheyenne Mountain springs to mind.

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    9. Re:Why not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It has been my experience that they only use these double-double-cover-ups when the project has some serious voodoo."

      Oh really? How many of these have you seen firsthand?

    10. Re:Why not? by neutz · · Score: 1
      No, I am not suggesting some kind of bizarre conspiracy, just some 'front project' to cover up something that may involve new laser assault/defense syste...

      Uhh... yeah.

      The guy who's listed in the document as the project lead (Frank B. Mead, Jr.) has done some other work with frickin' lasers.

    11. Re:Why not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And we read The Art of War because, as MBA students, we learned that the Chinese are masters of warfare. After all, despite being conquered by nearly every colonial power, they did manage to invade and defeat a massively outnumbered neighboring pacifist nation.

    12. Re:Why not? by lachlan76 · · Score: 1

      new laser assault/defense systems, sonic weaponry, or new methods of fighter control mechanisms or something that might be really cool

      And you think it can be done for a million a year?

    13. Re:Why not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you mean double-secret-coverups and if you blow their coverup you're put on double-secret-probation.

    14. Re:Why not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Or it could be they want us to think it is a hoax project because they are tantalizingly close to actually teleportation. It has been my experience that they only use these double-double-cover-ups when the project has some serious voodoo. But then again I could be wrong."

      In my experience as an ex Control agent the whole double-double thing has been soundly discredited. It's more likely a double-double-redirect so that enemy agents are going to believe that we really aren't funding dubious research. They think there is something else being funded. In reality of course, we are funding the exact opposite of what we want them to believe which is that it's something scientifically credible. This technique was used to throw them off when we researched time warping. I bet you didn't know the Soviet Union actually won the cold war.

    15. Re:Why not? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yeah, I forgot to mention, the Soviets only won the first two times around. We won the time that actually went into the past (history).

    16. Re:Why not? by eikonos · · Score: 1

      I think you're right about it being a front project for some way-out-there research that they don't want to report on yet. I think the military may be actually researching "diplomacy", "tact" and "cooperation".

  34. Ironic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    random quote on the bottom of the screen is "You cannot achieve the impossible without attempting the absurd."

  35. at one time... by zxnos · · Score: 1

    ...the earth being round, gravity, flying, going to the moon, going to mars (hopefully soon) and other things where considered 'crackpot' ideas. while psychic teleportation appears extremely unlikley, it could happen. in my humble opinion science has barely scratched the surface. why rule anything out?

    --
    always mosh clockwise
    1. Re:at one time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The point is not to "rule anything out" - it's to invesigate things that we have turned up *hard, verifiable data* for. By your reasoning, we could try unicorns or pink elephants...

  36. but what about..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the pattern buffers? we all know what happens when they get screwed with, a la evil William Shatner *shivers*

  37. Couldn't hurt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm waiting for Bush's faith based defense system. They can hire a few dozen religious leaders to pray the missile defense system works. If it hits something then it can formally be considered a miracle.

    Maybe praying can make the deficit go away? Electing Republican Presidents sure isn't working.

  38. Skewed Priorities in Our Government's Spending by darkstream · · Score: 1

    Although I'm all for investigative science, and although I'm willing to concede that we don't know everything, when I see how much money they're spending on this I have to suspect somebody's pulling somebody else's chain here. What is sad to me, however, is that if this sum of money was spent on the poor and the needy there would be an outcry about entitlements. There just isn't any balance out there. :/

    --
    Fun with Inkwell | www.coo
  39. Well-Spontanous Human Combustion. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "While highly implausible, the whole idea of science is to discover things that one wouldn't expect. If soundly gathered evidence suggests psychic powers or teleportation is real, then we should investigate it. If the facts fit, then no matter how much someone might not desire to accept an explanation (whether it be for or against any phenomena), it is most likely the truth."

    We're still having trouble dealing with UFO's. What makes you think we're going to handle psychic phenomenon any better?

  40. U Muggles by iMaple · · Score: 0

    /HarryPotter/
    U muggles just love to waste money.
    /HarryPotter_End/

    1. Re:U Muggles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When will the moderators get a sense of humor. The referes to the teleportation in the Harry Potter books .

  41. that is nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The entire program is less than the price of an airplane, and about the price of a couple of smart bombs.

  42. Conveniently... by GlacierDragon · · Score: 1

    Despite all their reports that UFO's do not exist, the report lists references to UFO encounters as partial justification for this research. "There are also a small number of credible reports of individuals who reported being teleported to/from UFOs during a UFO close encounter, which were scientifically investigated (Vallee, 1988, 1990, 1997)." I think the key line, though, is the line above that one: "Most claimed instances of human teleportation of the body from one place to another have been unwitnessed." Gee, I wonder why?

    --
    http://glacierdragon.smugmug.com - Check out my photos. No need to buy, even though I do need the money!
  43. Quantum Physics and the Quantum Mind by jmulvey · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think some of the justification behind this research may be based on the fact that some researchers are starting to believe the brain is a quantum device. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mind

    Quantum theory (at least mathematically) does allow for teleportation, and so capabilities such as "remote viewing" and so forth *might* be there. But who knows.

    1. Re:Quantum Physics and the Quantum Mind by haluness · · Score: 1

      Nice SF story based on this idea:
      http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail /-/0061 054232/qid=1099695307/br=1-4/ref=br_lf_b_4//002-35 85591-0896067?v=glance&s=books&n=15092

    2. Re:Quantum Physics and the Quantum Mind by haluness · · Score: 1
    3. Re:Quantum Physics and the Quantum Mind by bhny · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Penrose and his wacky quantum ideas are way outside of mainstream thinking on the brain.

      his logic seems to be:
      -consciousness is mysterious
      -quantum physics is mysterious
      -therefore consciousness involves quantum physics

      about as sensible as collecting underpants

    4. Re:Quantum Physics and the Quantum Mind by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      You might want to read Ingo Swann. He has demonstrated Remote Viewing several times in a scientific setting. I'm not sure why this isn't better known.

    5. Re:Quantum Physics and the Quantum Mind by srleffler · · Score: 1
      I'm not sure why this isn't better known.

      Perhaps it's related to the fact that his web address is "biomindsuperpowers.com".

    6. Re:Quantum Physics and the Quantum Mind by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      Not sure if that comment is meant to be serious scientific criticism or not.

      The research was done at Stanford in the 70s, before the WWW ever existed.

    7. Re:Quantum Physics and the Quantum Mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah except there is nothing scientific to criticize. Just lots of unsubstantiated claims and cold-war era story telling.

    8. Re:Quantum Physics and the Quantum Mind by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      Again, you show your determined ignorance.

      Wikipedia page

    9. Re:Quantum Physics and the Quantum Mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "he neutrality of this article is disputed."

      Why is that there? And if it wasn't, what makes you think wikipedia is anything more than a quick reference?

    10. Re:Quantum Physics and the Quantum Mind by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      Because your attitude isn't unusual. For any phenomenon such as this to get taken seriously, the proposers have to jump through hoops that simply aren't demanded of more plausible techologies.

    11. Re:Quantum Physics and the Quantum Mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe because he's a wacko who seems to seriously believe in those ridiculous plant polygraph experiments.

    12. Re:Quantum Physics and the Quantum Mind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On remote viewing, IIRC, last weekend this was covered on a Sci-Fi channel "investigative" type show. They had evidence for 3 cases, 1st was an alien abduction, 2nd was a haunted fire house, 3rd was remote viewing. Only 1 of the 3 was to be considered "validated", and we get to find out at the end of the show (spoiler :) : it was remote viewing that won).

      IIRC they got the military guy from the former black project that was declassified and some of his remote viewers. Sat them down and had them sketch details they remotely viewed of their target.

      The target was a girl on a motorcycle that rode around a specific course through the city. Afterwards they took the viewers on that course. The viewers scored many "hits", meaning that their sketches and accounts reproduced identifiable specifics that were on target.

      I don't remember the name of the show but someone might recognize it or be able to look it up. It's very interesting, and to me seems to defy odds that something coincidental happened. I remember that guy's position on remote viewing is that it is a skill that can be learned like any other skill.

      This is just one of many questionable projects the US has funded over time. Also I think I just read that Bush's latest budget allocated over $30 billion to black projects which is a record #. So that money goes to who-knows-what, but in the past various psychic/paranormal studies have been a part of it.

    13. Re:Quantum Physics and the Quantum Mind by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      Did a bit of research, the programme was Proof Positive and the guy was David Moorhouse. Never heard of him myself, but Puthoff has. Nice quote:

      "most skeptics are not skeptical enough - they tend to accept the given wisdom without questioning it."

    14. Re:Quantum Physics and the Quantum Mind by nickco3 · · Score: 1
      All really good new theories start out as wacky ideas outside the mainstream. Richard Feynman used to give this advice to his physics students:

      The chance is high that the truth lies in the fashionable direction. But, on the off-chance that it is in another direction who will find it? Only someone who has sacrificed his career studying quantum electodynamics from a peculiar and unfashonable point fo view; one that he may have had to invent for himself.

      --
      -- Nick "Hallo this is Beel Gates, und I pronounce weendows as ... WEENdows"
    15. Re:Quantum Physics and the Quantum Mind by RichardX · · Score: 1

      Interesting.. Right now I'm about halfway through The Emperor' s New Mind (bought on a whim the other day, because it looked kinda interesting and was marked down), which is my first encounter with Penrose, and I have to say I've had very much the same feeling about him. Kinda nice to know I'm not the only one who feels that way. Still an interesting read though :)

      --
      Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
  44. Fortune Cookie by centauri · · Score: 1

    The fortune cookie at the bottom of this page read(s): "You cannot achieve the impossible without attempting the absurd." How apt.

    From the Air Force's point of view, this is probably not as crazy as it sounds to those of us with half a brain. I can imagine some general thinking that if there's even the slightest chance of psychic teleportation being real, $50,000 isn't much to pay for a report looking into it. The same goes for things like anti-gravity. These guys probably figure that what would be a waste would be dismissing it out of hand, especially if their enemies might look into it and get the upper hand.

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Durga.
    1. Re:Fortune Cookie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meanwhile, their (our) enemies are attacking us with box cutters and road-side bombs.

      The problem with this isn't whether psychic teleportation is possible or not. The problem is that taxpayer funds are being wasted on this when there are American needs that are much more pressing and immediate. I've worked in DoD research labs and in contractor jobs, and this is simply wishful thinking by a company that doesn't have jack for a product to get some money.

    2. Re:Fortune Cookie by centauri · · Score: 1

      I agree that this is someone's wishful thinking. However, pressing and immediate problems can't occupy every cent of our money and second of our time. Psychic teleportation might be pie-in-the-sky but there are lots of things without direct application to the problem of road-side bombs or any other practical problem that are still deserving of research. That's one way progress is made.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Durga.
  45. Missile Defense by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 2, Informative
    Hey, compared to the billions (with a B) spent on missile defense (which has almost no chance of working) this is a drop in the bucket.

    Given the choice, 8 million that MIGHT have a radical payoff is a bargain. Billions spent on a specific application of physics is pointless. Even if the system works, the only application for a missile defense system is knocking out high-speed projectiles.

    It won't help with knocking out asteroids (too much kinetic energy involved) nor will it help defend against more mondane forms of attack.

    Considering that the Pentagon spend $600 million on air travel, this is cake, Cake.

    --
    "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
    --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    1. Re:Missile Defense by ch-chuck · · Score: 4, Funny

      8 million that MIGHT have a radical payoff is a bargain.

      Psychic Research is probably about the only way they're ever going to find Bin Laden anyway.

      --
      try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
    2. Re:Missile Defense by PeterM+from+Berkeley · · Score: 1

      Yes, a drop in the bucket, but this amount of money would make a huge difference to other places in the Air Force Research Lab where real weapon development is taking place.

      Take for example this low-funded project which involves trying to detect weapons in a crowd of demonstrators using radar:
      http://www.house.gov/hasc/openingstatement sandpres sreleases/108thcongress/04-04-21wynne.html

      We could have been using that money to answer the question: can we detect armed enemies in a crowd of mostly innocent people?

    3. Re:Missile Defense by Colonel+Cholling · · Score: 1

      Hey, compared to the billions (with a B)

      Is that American billions (10^9) or everyone else's billions (10^12)?

      --

      I am Sartre of the Borg. Existence is futile.
    4. Re:Missile Defense by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1

      Billions with a "B" is a reference to the movie "The Pentagon Wars."

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    5. Re:Missile Defense by tabrnaker · · Score: 1

      It would help if they put some effort into finding him.

    6. Re:Missile Defense by mink · · Score: 1

      Will this RADAR be able to tell the undercover cops from the terrorists?

      --
      Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
  46. Basic theory of science by macaran · · Score: 2, Insightful
    In my humblest of opinions, it's a silly thing for any scientist to be upset about. The basic, overarching, redundent, axiom of all physical science is "all interactions of matter in the universe are deterministic."

    That is to say, there is not such thing as a "spirit realm" or "magic" or any way of controling the universe without a clear cause and effect. This is a compleatly logical assumption to make. If you don't make it, science becomes a guess work filled with "maybes." It is nessiary for the scientific method.

    It is not nessisarly true. For all practical purposes it seems to be true. However, ask anyone who belives in a god, or who practices magik, and they will tell you it is falce.

    You can not say a study is worthless based on an axiom. For instance, I give that all Jews are gready, therefore all people trying to deny anti-seminism are wasting time, because it's true. Likewise, I give that magical mater interactions are inpossible, therefore all people studying them are wasting time, because they don't exist.

    Anyway, it probibly is a waste of time; people just need a valid argument for it being a waste. :-o

    1. Re:Basic theory of science by halfelven · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's a good thing you're humble, because you're wrong.
      Total determinism was an ancient dream of science that proved wrong. Einstein was the last of the "titans" to believe in it. The quantum physics guys demolished that dream.
      At the quantum level, everything is a probability. It's just that things play out in such a way that, at a macro level, the Universe appears to be deterministic. But that's just an emergent property of a probabilistical foundation.

      But i agree with you that psychic phenomena should not be rejected outright, based on present day's scientific dogma.

    2. Re:Basic theory of science by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 1
      At the quantum level, everything is a probability.

      But what about below that?

      We still don't know the structure at or about the Planck length. Is it deterministic with minute variations in dimensional string tension percolating through the quantum foam so that, via the law of large numbers, it looks predictably probabilistic? Beneath that, is the universe governed by a deterministic cellular sub-space? Who knows. All I know is that any-time you got 10^34 things in a single centimeter, whatever the heck you measure there is going to look pretty random, whether it's random or not.

      And, just because it's deterministic doesn't mean it's predictable, usually because of the non-linear nature of the system, the imprecise knowledge of the initial state, and the sheer size of the computation.

      --
      That is all.
    3. Re:Basic theory of science by FirstTimeCaller · · Score: 1

      But i agree with you that psychic phenomena should not be rejected outright, based on present day's scientific dogma.

      There is no scientific dogma! That's the whole point of science! Theories are proven, improved upon or rejected. Sure sometimes it takes time to let go of our long held beliefs, but if a new theory better describes the world around us, then we have no choice but to embrace it.

      As far as paranormal/psychic phenomena are concerned, the evidence has yet to be presented. I hold out little belief that it every will, but hey prove me wrong and I will change my opinion. The scientific method demands it of me.

      --
      Wanted: witty unique signature. Must be willing to relocate.
  47. This wasn't nearly as wasteful... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...as the 23 billion they spent on a crop circle-based anti-ballistic missile system.

  48. Maybe they were thinking of by Dachannien · · Score: 1
  49. It's about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I have been patiently waiting for this technology to be developed so that I will finally have a chance to contact my home planet.

    I will also be able to contact my planet's rental spaceship company to tell them where to pick up their stupid craft. Next time I go with a reputable rental agency.

  50. Coast to Coast AM by HumanTorch · · Score: 1

    I think the gov't needs to have these types of programs periodically to keep all the crackpots out there focused on something... instead of becoming a danger to the rest of society. I would rather have some psychopath sitting in the middle of his living room practicing psychic teleportation than practicing shooting out of the trunk of a car.

    Has anybody ever listend to Art Bell? There are some SERIOUSLY delusional people out there.

    1. Re:Coast to Coast AM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has anybody ever listend to Art Bell? There are some SERIOUSLY delusional people out there.

      I'm a fairly regular coast-to-coast listener. While a lot of the guests are pretty much over the edge, I find the show to be thought provoking. Even when I feel like the line of discussion is utterly idiotic, I enjoy the way it forces my mind to work; that is, taking in new / bizarre concepts and compelling me to think critically about the various possibilities / impossibilities of the situation. Not unlike watching or reading a work of science fiction. This is a better form of entertainment than a lot of what else we are offered.

      One glaring exception to this standard of suspended disbelief, is Richard C. Hoagland. I cannot suffer for one minute this man's inane ravings. I've listened well, and about all I can conclude is that Richard just simply loves to hear himself talk, and see his name in print next to Art's. Don't get me started about the alien spacecraft crash debris on the Mars rover landing site. You know that face on Mars? I swear, I can see egg all over it.

  51. Re:USAF Save money in the long run by packethead · · Score: 1

    Or to yank Haliburton execs out of Iraq in just the nick of time....

    --
    .sig
  52. My 2 cents...Change due. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "There seems to have been an exponential growth in technology. Where did it all come from?"

    Short answer: Science (along with) technology follows an exponential curve. That whole "Building upon the Shoulders of Giants" is a hint of how. You discover thing. Others discover thing. That leads to more discoveries, by a larger group of people. Get the point? You don't need UFO's or other absurd explanations.

  53. Counter-Espionage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look, the military isn't crazy. Programs like these are used to find spies within the classified programs. There are certain scientists the military thinks are spies, so they put them into these crazy projects and watch them. If Russian intell all of a sudden starts getting word of the USAF doing psychic programs, then the US military knows they have a real spy.

  54. It does work! I can prove it! by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    Step 1. Use PSYCHIC spam in written pdf documents to confuse the executive with buzzwords and mixed up terms.

    Step 2. Use taxpayers' money to demonstrate the effect.

    Step 3: Now you see it, now you don't. IT WORKS!!!!

  55. Wasn't this done before?... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't that why the Philidelphia Experiment happened? :|

  56. Jon Ronson: The Road to Abu Ghraib by imipak · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    Here's an extract from an excellent new book by Guardian journalist Jon Ronson. No further comment needed from me: read this and weep.

    The road to Abu Ghraib

    "In the wake of Vietnam, the US military were demoralised and prey to some fairly crazy ideas. They thought they could train 'super soldiers' with psychic powers. In this first extract from his revealing new book, Jon Ronson describes how their aspirations were perverted in the prisons of Iraq."

    I should declare my own bais here. I think the USA is finished; the only question is how much damage it will cause the rest of the world in it's death throes in the next few decades.

    Don't believe me? OK, just keep an eye on the US dollar vs Euro. The invisible hand is voting...

    --

    Underneath the blue skies
    Beautiful empty dying dolls...

    1. Re:Jon Ronson: The Road to Abu Ghraib by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't believe me? OK, just keep an eye on the US dollar vs Euro. The invisible hand is voting...

      Wow, that's real deep. Tell me, does the UK looks half deader than the 1980s? cuz you know, the british pound has lost almost half of its value since then.

      Also, just to remind you the economics-101 class you slept through, a strong Euro means the EC is at a great disadvantage to export its wares compared to the US.

      Please go back to school before talking bollocks...

    2. Re:Jon Ronson: The Road to Abu Ghraib by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not that I really disagree with your overall theme, but the reason that the dollar is going down is because Dubya decided to raise the debt ceiling by another $80 billion dollars. That was the direct cause.

      Whatever happened to the Republicans that tried to get a balanced budget amendment passed?

      Having said that, WTF does this have to do with Teleportation?

    3. Re:Jon Ronson: The Road to Abu Ghraib by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To help US readers understand this post, our Guardian is the equivalent of your Weekly World News or National Inquirer. The parent strains credulity using "excellent" and "Guardian" in the same sentence.

    4. Re:Jon Ronson: The Road to Abu Ghraib by dwbryson · · Score: 1, Informative

      Here's an extract from an excellent new book by Guardian journalist Jon Ronson.

      Nobody takes the guardian seriously anymore. Especially after they tried to influence the election and called for the assassination of the president.

      Don't believe me? OK, just keep an eye on the US dollar vs Euro. The invisible hand is voting...

      *sigh* more people that think economics is a zero sum game.

      Currencies fluxuating with 'up' and 'down' are not a zero sum game. If the dollar is 'weak' that means foreign currency can buy more goods with the same amount of money as before. This makes american goods and services more affordable and attractive to buyers. Conversely if the dollar is 'strong' it means other currencies are 'weak' thus making foreign goods cheaper and more attractive, this then allows the economy to more efficiently allocat the money that would have been spent on those goods somewhere else. This is basic economic theory and not difficult to understand.

      So please, tout that the dollar being weak is a 'bad thing'. Meanwhile I'll be reaping the benefits of more US exports to europe.

      This garbage about 'my currency' is better then 'your currency' is rediculous. You sound like Paul Krugman.

      --
      - "Never let a computer tell me shit." - DelTron Zero
    5. Re:Jon Ronson: The Road to Abu Ghraib by Pros_n_Cons · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up!
      Idiotic slashdotter bashing the united states on an unrelated topic.. mod up!

      --

      -- "of course thats just my opinion, I could be wrong." --Dennis Miller
    6. Re:Jon Ronson: The Road to Abu Ghraib by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The currency analysis is half right. While a low dollar might (should) help alleviate a trade deficit, the US is also running an historically large budget deficit. The US is financing itself with debt, largely purchased by entities outside of the US. So, if the dollar continues to fall, the US runs the risk of losing an awful lot of investors. To make US Govt debt attractive, you then get higher interest rates, which will in turn kill off investment and growth by the private sector. You then can get into a vicious circle of high rates and a collapsing economy (as opposed to the virtuous circle experienced when our budget was under control under Clinton). You shouldn't critcize someone like Krugman unless you actually understand the whole picture.

    7. Re:Jon Ronson: The Road to Abu Ghraib by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      Nobody takes the guardian seriously anymore. Especially after they tried to influence the election and called for the assassination of the president.

      Actually, the Guardian is the most respected paper in the UK amongst people with an IQ more than twice their waist measurement.

      Trying to influence your election seems like a good idea to me. I tried it myself. Bush has deceived us Brits into 2 unwinnable wars, 1 against a against a fanatical guerilla enemy, the other against a non-existent enemy.

      He probably also wrecked the ecosystem (Kyoto) and stopped the Microsoft breakup (which I take personally).

      I'd also like to point out the difference between a journalist and a columnist. Ronson is a columnist and so is the guy who humourously called for assassination.

      Fair points about the currency though, can't tell except in the long term.

    8. Re:Jon Ronson: The Road to Abu Ghraib by payndz · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Nobody takes the guardian seriously anymore... and called for the assassination of the president [msn.com]

      Oh please. It's not like this was a Guardian editorial. Charlie Brooker, the author of said column, is a humorist and comedian, for fuck's sake. And one who enjoys winding up the easily offended, at that. Occasionally he goes right to the edge - such as when he got an issue of PC Zone magazine pulled from the shelves of the UK's largest chains of newsagents for a comic strip called 'Cruelty Zoo' - but while his stuff is often twisted, it's still very funny.

      Check out TV Go Home to see what else he does for a living.

      --
      You must think in Russian.
    9. Re:Jon Ronson: The Road to Abu Ghraib by dwbryson · · Score: 1

      The currency analysis is half right. While a low dollar might (should) help alleviate a trade deficit, the US is also running an historically large budget deficit. The US is financing itself with debt, largely purchased by entities outside of the US. So, if the dollar continues to fall, the US runs the risk of losing an awful lot of investors. To make US Govt debt attractive, you then get higher interest rates, which will in turn kill off investment and growth by the private sector.

      This theory was dispelled in the 80's when Regan made his much criticized his supply side tax cuts. Krugman himself gave chicken little 'the sky is falling' predictions about these only to have the largest economic growth period since the end of world war 2.
      This is dictated from the Laffer Curve, the modern accepted theory of economic behavior. Part of the defined behavior is that the deficit increases(which always makes me wonder why people suddenly get upset when this happens after supply side tax cuts). However, tax receipts increase as well as household wealth. Some of you may remember Regan's quote about "rising water lifts all ships", this is exactly what he is talking about.

      This relates very closely to the whole idea of the deficit. One can look in the media and see millions of documents talking about how evil deficits are and how they will ruin the U.S. economy. Some how people are failing to see the relationship to borrowing and paying back money and how it relates to the government.

      For example, if one were to buy a house usually it requires a loan for a large amount of money from the bank. This loan requires you to pay back the total amount of the loan over time, but during that time the capital you have purchase with that loan acrues value on its own. By the time the loan has been paid off the capital can generate revenue either by its inherent properties(for example factory equipment at a comopany) or by selling it for a market price higher than what it was purchased for(and hopefully adjusted for inflation you make a profit!)

      The government borrowing money from 'itself' with the supply side cuts to stimulate the economy is a Good Thing(tm) and as we are already seeing the US economy is chugging right along after the Bush cuts in 2003.

      You then can get into a vicious circle of high rates and a collapsing economy (as opposed to the virtuous circle experienced when our budget was under control under Clinton).

      Unfortunatly my economic history is vauge under Clinton so I cannot comment on this statement. I do know that he raised taxes several times in the late 90's, but I don't have the raw numbers handy to analize it.

      You shouldn't critcize someone like Krugman unless you actually understand the whole picture.

      Krugman has absolutly no credibility. Like I described before when the world of economics moved on passed Keynesian theory and onto Laffer theory Krugman never got the memo. Not to mention his own political adjenda that is quite bias. As a matter of fact he has an entire column dedicated to correcting his half-truths called The Krugman Truth Squad.

      --
      - "Never let a computer tell me shit." - DelTron Zero
  57. Not very much. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uh, when it comes to defense spending, 1.5 mil is nothing. . .

  58. Flashback to 1939... by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 1

    Can you picture how ridiculous studying Nuclear Fission would have seemed before WWII. Let me see, you want to spend a pile of money to bang two superdense rocks together to make them explode? NEXT!

    --
    "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
    --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
    1. Re:Flashback to 1939... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There had been a theoretical framework to support this idea since the early 1900's - this framework was proven to be correct in a good number of other situations before attention turned to military purposes. There's no such framework for this poop - NEXT!

  59. this is why I voted for Kerry by SetupWeasel · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Psychic Teleportation? How about physically teleporting some modern flak jackets to Iraq. I hear we have people in danger there without them.

    1. Re:this is why I voted for Kerry by SetupWeasel · · Score: 1

      Aw crap. I meant transporting.

    2. Re:this is why I voted for Kerry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why did John Kerry vote for the 87 billion before voting against it again?

    3. Re:this is why I voted for Kerry by FurryFeet · · Score: 1

      Yeah, there are lots of iraqui civilians expecting an American bullet. Send those flak jackets!

  60. Summary of 88 page report by Sai+Babu · · Score: 2, Funny



    Maybe you can push a string after all.
    But only if it's a really tiny string and there's enough grant money.

  61. PDF link? by HaeMaker · · Score: 1

    Please, please, PLEASE, warn us that links go to PDFs!

    1. Re:PDF link? by imsabbel · · Score: 1

      Why?
      Serious question.
      If you dont have acrobat installed, it will just prompt a download. Oh what a desaster!!!
      If you have it installed, it will open the pdf. Witness the HORROR!!!
      THe only thing you could lose is about 5 seconds (starting Acrobat reader or clicking away the file save prompt), but i guess if you value your time that much you wouldnt be reading /.

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
  62. Psychic teleportation? by lpangelrob2 · · Score: 1, Funny
    I have to imagine that most slashdotters engage in psychic teleportation when they try to picture themselves with the opposite sex...

    Yeah, we could be together, and hold hands, and you would be my girlfriend, and... did I just say that out loud?

    The only problem is that the random hot girl would probably just smack you back to reality, producing a failure rate of 100%.

    1. Re:Psychic teleportation? by lew3004 · · Score: 1

      Yeah but that's not generally worth 1.5 million dollars; that's usually worth a dime a dozen.

      --
      I still can't get the screen shots of Castle Wolfenstein for the Apple IIe out of my head.
  63. RTCW-Style Research? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did this story remind anyone of the actions of the SS in Return to Castle Wolfenstein? Research into the paranormal to create super soldiers? They've probably already started the genetic mods behind closed doors; maybe they are making this public to imply that they aren't working in secret over there.

  64. It's either this.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    or a $1.5 million stapler. You pick.

    1. Re:It's either this.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The stapler is useful...

    2. Re:It's either this.... by cmdr_beeftaco · · Score: 1

      I can't have both?

  65. It's a joke-What's in a rep? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Until the DoD comes out and says, "yes, this is ours and we published it in all seriousness," please stop believing everything you read on the Internet."

    DAMN! There goes Slashdot.

  66. Imagine Reporting your progress on the project.... by Timmy+D+Programmer · · Score: 1

    Well boss. I concentrated really really really hard today. Still not dematerializing. Although I felt a little extra light headed this time. Gimme another million bucks, mabye I'll figure it out tomorrow.

    --


    (If at first you don't succeed, do it different next time!)
  67. funding by OwlofCreamCheese · · Score: 1

    remember, we have funded 'remote viewing' before. and when all the budgetting came back.... it was just a cover for radar technology and a nice laughable front that will make the soviets laugh and think us quaint while a bit of the budget goes to something real behind the scenes.

    --
    -You're wasting your time. Alfador only likes me.
  68. Closed minded psuedo-intellectuals by aristotle-dude · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Any scientist worth anything would at least look for some evidence for or against rather than dismissing out of hand like the lot of you.

    I'm quite frankly tired of the hypocrisy I see on ./. On the one hand you accuse the christian right of being bigoted or closed minded while in the same breath demonstrate how close minded and bigoted you are.

    Want to see who you are complaining about? Look in the mirror.

    Science is supposed to be a tool for discovery, not a religion like some of you make it out to be.

    Is aids research a waste of money because no cure has been found yet? Are all studies that reach a dead end a waste of money or do they provide us with valuable insight?

    --
    Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    1. Re:Closed minded psuedo-intellectuals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      We already have, and continue to do so.

      http://skepdic.com/randi.html

    2. Re:Closed minded psuedo-intellectuals by beeplet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't see this as hypocrisy - I see it as holding studies of psychic phenomena to the same standards as other scientific studies, i.e., well-documented methods, peer-reviewed results, and demonstrated repeatablility.

      The additional skepticism most people apply to claims of telekenesis probably comes from the fact that is an overwhelming number of counter-examples in everyday experience. Can you move objects with your mind? I can't. Therefore I am not very likely to readily believe that anyone can. This is different than saying, for example, "I can't play piano, therefore I doubt anyone can," because playing the piano is an ability which is a matter of degrees. If you can push a key, you can imagine someone playing a fugue. If you can walk, you can imagine running a marathon. But if every experience of your life confirms that you can't move objects just by thinking about it, not even a little bit, it is reasonable to hold someone who claims they can to a very high standard of proof.

    3. Re:Closed minded psuedo-intellectuals by Dominic_Mazzoni · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Any scientist worth anything would at least look for some evidence for or against rather than dismissing out of hand like the lot of you.

      Exactly. We're being critical of the report because it recommends that the U.S. military spend millions on research on dubious ideas, with no evidence that the ideas have any merit.

      I'm quite frankly tired of the hypocrisy I see on ./. On the one hand you accuse the christian right of being bigoted or closed minded while in the same breath demonstrate how close minded and bigoted you are.

      Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. There's a difference between being open minded to the possibility that you might be wrong, and wasting enormous amounts of money and effort into an idea that has already been shown countless times to be worthless, when there are millions of other, very promising ideas, that should be funded.

      Want to see who you are complaining about? Look in the mirror.

      Science is supposed to be a tool for discovery, not a religion like some of you make it out to be.


      That's exactly right...and the way the tool works, is that you discover whether something is true or not using a repeatable experiment. Since every attempt to repeatably test psychic powers and teleportation has failed, there's clearly nothing to discover. Think of it this way: if someone really could repeatedly predict the future or teleport, don't you think more people would know about it? The fact is that everyone who has claimed to have this ability has been unwilling to demonstrate it under scientifically controlled conditions.

      Someday, if someone does discover psychic or telekinetic abilities and they can reproduce them under controlled conditions, scientists will be lining up to study them and try to learn more about how it works.

      Is aids research a waste of money because no cure has been found yet? Are all studies that reach a dead end a waste of money or do they provide us with valuable insight?

      There's a huge difference. AIDS research isn't blind - it doesn't succeed or fail completely. AIDS research is focused on understanding how HIV works, exactly how it might be destroyed or suppressed, or how its symptoms could be treated. Even the most theoretical AIDS research starts with a very specific theory about exactly how AIDS could be cured, based on observations made in other experiments.

    4. Re:Closed minded psuedo-intellectuals by oGMo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ah... moderate or post, moderate or post... let's post:

      Can you move objects with your mind? I can't. Therefore I am not very likely to readily believe that anyone can. This is different than saying, for example, "I can't play piano, therefore I doubt anyone can," because playing the piano is an ability which is a matter of degrees.

      This is logically unsound. This assumes that TK is something that doesn't need training (or perhaps innate ability). This implies that it exists in a particular manner, which you then claim it does not, because you don't have it. Circular reasoning!

      I'm not claiming it does exist or not, and I do agree with your first paragraph: it should be held to the same standards of repeatability as anything else. But the parent poster is who I agree with most. People are unwilling to even study something because it conflicts with their personal beliefs. This is science as a religion, not science as an academic tool.

      --

      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage

    5. Re:Closed minded psuedo-intellectuals by Moofie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OK, /., you can all come over to my house. We'll look in my mirror. All, what? Couple hundred thousand of you. Who have different opinions. And are not part of the same consciousness.

      How can something with three quarters of a million minds be "closed minded"? How can something that spans every nation and (probably) every socio-economic group be "bigoted"?

      Are there closed-minded people? Sure. Are there bigots? Absolutely. But the community is not the same thing as its individual members.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    6. Re:Closed minded psuedo-intellectuals by srleffler · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Any scientist worth anything would at least look for some evidence for or against rather than dismissing out of hand like the lot of you.

      Actually, that is not how science works. If scientists accepted and looked for evidence for or against every hypothesis, we would never make any progress. You have to have some way of filtering the small number of ideas that are likely to be fruitful from the much larger pool of ideas that aren't going to get you anywhere. The way we do this is through a paradigm--an overall understanding of "how things work". Ideas that don't fit the current paradigm are rejected. We may of course miss some valid ideas that way, but the vast majority of ideas that are rejected are worthless. The valid ideas we miss will get picked up later, in some future paradigm shift.

    7. Re:Closed minded psuedo-intellectuals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > On the one hand you accuse the christian right of being bigoted or closed minded while in the same breath demonstrate how close minded and bigoted you are.

      Oh, I don't accuse them of being close-minded, even if as followers of a dogma, they tend to be. Their minds, their rules, I say.

      I accuse them of claiming a mandate to teach claims that are bullshit, and arrogating the moral authority to enforce action on those claims. The open or closed state of my own mind is not relevant here.

      See how the crackpots fit in? They're mostly harmless, but they still manage to waste our money...

    8. Re:Closed minded psuedo-intellectuals by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1

      So what you are saying is science is conducted based on one's own beliefs and preconscieved ideas? I'm not suggesting the scientific community pour millions of dollars on dubious pursuits but an honest "search" for evidence should be conducted. People say there is no evidence but what of the other studies in other countries? Do they have no merit because they were not conducted on US soil?

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    9. Re:Closed minded psuedo-intellectuals by el-spectre · · Score: 1

      Bear in mind that those 'beliefs and preconceived ideas' have, generally speaking, already been tested. Can they be wrong? Sure, but until some kind of decent evidence for the new hypothesis is advanced, why look into it?

      In short, if your mind is TOO open, you become Art Bell and believe any fool idea out there.

      Not to say that new ideas aren't ever backed by evidence. For example, check out the 'Dinosaur Heresies' by Robert Bakker some time. 30 years ago he presented a number of revolutionary ideas to the paleontological world, and was laughed off the stage. So he went out and found massive evidence to support his theories. Now the then 'impossible' theories like quasi-warm blooded dinosaurs, and tyranosaurs as scavengers, are widely accepted.

      For every one maverick who is ahead of their time, there are 999 loonies who have no proof. Hence, the skepticism. In time the 1 in a thousand good theories will be proven.

      --
      "Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
    10. Re:Closed minded psuedo-intellectuals by Feanturi · · Score: 1

      Someday, if someone does discover psychic or telekinetic abilities and they can reproduce them under controlled conditions, scientists will be lining up to study them and try to learn more about how it works.

      Which is exactly why I only exercise my flying, time-travel, and incindiery powers when nobody is watching. Oh damn, I probably shouldn't have said that..

    11. Re:Closed minded psuedo-intellectuals by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Luke: "I don't believe it..."
      Yoda: "That is why you fail."

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    12. Re:Closed minded psuedo-intellectuals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shit tastes delicious. Millions of insects can't be wrong.

    13. Re:Closed minded psuedo-intellectuals by srleffler · · Score: 1
      No, not one's own beliefs and preconceived ideas. New ideas are evaluated in the context of the overall picture of how things work, that is shared by the scientific community as a whole (or at least by everyone in one field). Yes, this is using preconceptions to filter which ideas are worth exploring further and which are not. This process is absolutely vital to science. Our existing understanding of the world (based on previous experiments to verify and disprove theories) shapes our view of which of the vast supply of hypotheses are worth investigating. Without this filter, we would waste huge amounts of time exploring worthless ideas, and science would never get anywhere.

      One of the problems with the whole paranormal field is that it is pretty hard to set up a good, unbiased experimental program. Most of the research that has been done in this field is useless due to subtle or not so subtle experiment design problems. The proponents tend to just keep using the data and making unsupportable claims anyway. That kind of behaviour pretty much puts a field outside the bounds of what can be explored scientificly. If the the scientific community cannot come to agreement on what constitutes a valid experiment, then there is no way to collect evidence to support or disprove a theory. If you want to "search for evidence", you have to have some agreement on how to determine what evidence is valid.

    14. Re:Closed minded psuedo-intellectuals by srleffler · · Score: 1
      Other favorite examples of scientific "heresies" that later revolutionized scientific thinking: In both cases, these researchers' claims were completely rejected by the scientific community, but they were able to accumulate sufficient evidence to get their ideas accepted in the end.
  69. Research Grows on Trees by Mulletproof · · Score: 1

    "If soundly gathered evidence suggests psychic powers or teleportation is real, then we should investigate it."

    Sooo... That evidence is just going to come from thin air, or might they gave to -gasp!- fund research into such a project to see if it can be something useful? I'd say there has been enough unexplained phenomonom to warrent some sort of further research, and that research is going to cost money. Speciallized scientific equipment and scientific specialist don't exactly work for free you know. Detailed, scientific investigation amazingly enough costs money. Unless you're working for the SciFi channel and your scientists are plumbers by day. For any normal research, a million ain't that much given logistics, personnel equipment and other considerations.

    I see where you're going and I'm not even saying your right or wrong, just the way you're there is horribly, horribly flawed.

    --
    You need a FREE iPod Nano
    1. Re:Research Grows on Trees by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      Research is *not* throwing the entireity of modern physics down the toilet and making assumptions.

      It comes from a theory, with results, based on sound science, then published. Nobody laughs. Until such time as the results or the tests turn out to be unrepeatable (Cold Fusion anyone?) then you're likely to get a little snickering...

      (Darwin had this problem, btw. - evolution was a really crazy idea to suggest at the time - in fact he avoided publishing for years because he thought he would be ridiculed (still not sure about the idea of the bear falling into the sea and becoming a whale.... :) he did get some things a bit off....!). In time, though, his theories we shown to be based on sound science and have become mainstream.)

      These crackpots just want to grab headlines. If they're so convinced this works they can email me by root password. Should be easy, just grab it directly out of my brain.

  70. Patents by tonsofpcs · · Score: 1

    With all these new patent laws, I'm surprised no one has the patent for teleportation. Everything else that absolutely everyone has had an idea of/about is being patented now, why not teleportation or phase changing solid matter.

    --
    All this and more through Gene Splicing, Roddenberry or otherwise

  71. semi-seriously by Lord+Omlette · · Score: 1

    I don't know what the rest of you, but for me, the quote at the bottom of the page says "You cannot achieve the impossible without attempting the absurd."

    Hm...

    --
    [o]_O
  72. Appropriate 'fortune' quote by Chmarr · · Score: 1

    It seems very appropriate, perhaps spooky, that the 'fortune' quote at the bottom of the slashdot page is: "You cannot achieve the impossible without attempting the absurd."

  73. not so un-scientific... by catdevnull · · Score: 1

    ...part of the scientific process is to explore a theory and try to accept it as fact or debunk it as false.

    Studying this sort of stuff with a legit process isn't a bad thing. People will be laughing at our "science" 100 years from now, so don't get yer panties in a wad about curiosity and exploration of the unknown.

    ...get pissed when they use it to spy on you!

    This kinda reminds me of the Time Machine scene in Napoleon Dynamite...he he

    --

    I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
  74. Excellent! ...For my mage campaign! by lilmouse · · Score: 1

    This is great! Now I have a document discussing how the technocracy handles teleportation! I have an official document of scientific mumbo-jumbo that describes techno-magic!

    Thanks, USAF! You're making storytellers' lives better everywhere. More tax dollars for RPGs!

    --LWM

  75. Sounds familiar... by Spectracide · · Score: 1

    Didn't people learn anything from Quake?

  76. RTFYA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Read the Fine Yahoo Article:

    "The views expressed in the report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy of the Air Force, the Department of Defense (news - web sites) or the U.S. Government," says an Air Force Research Lab (AFRL) statement sent to USA TODAY. "There are no plans by the AFRL Propulsion Directorate for additional funding on this contract."

  77. Star Trek *Next Generation* by spaceturtle · · Score: 2, Informative
    The Star Trek vision, if anything, was about using science and technology to enhance people's lives.

    Maybe he meant Star Trek the Next Generation, you know the series where a couple of hours in paranormal training by native Americans allows Commander Riker to do weird shit like stopping time that 500 years of space age science hasn't achieved.

    1. Re:Star Trek *Next Generation* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Who modded that informative? It wasn't Commander Riker that stopped time, it was Wesley Crusher

    2. Re:Star Trek *Next Generation* by spaceturtle · · Score: 1

      I imagine Wesley Crusher stopped time at some point too, but I didn't see that episode.

    3. Re:Star Trek *Next Generation* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nah, watching wesley crusher you just thought that time had stopped.

  78. Googling Sam Cassel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google for Sam Cassel and u get the following website. This

  79. This is where your flak vests went by HangingChad · · Score: 1
    . The report calls for $7.5 million to conduct psychic teleportation experiments.

    The Army doesn't have enough flak vests or armor for the troops in Iraq but the Air Force has 7.5 million to sink into psychic teleportation research. Sure, I can see that. Just imagine being somewhere else when the roadside bomb goes off.

    So, this is what it's like being the minority party. You know, it's not all bad. You get to sit back and throw rocks non-stop without accepting any of the responsibility. You can criticize every little mistake with a clear conscience. I like it! If you want unity, go fuck yourself. Ha! I'm going to enjoy this four years.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    1. Re:This is where your flak vests went by Fnkmaster · · Score: 1

      As a point of fact, nobody spent the 7.5 mil, and it's never going to happen. They actually spent 25 thousand dollars on this "reasearch report", which we can all agree is probably mostly wasted. But a few thousand bucks here or there to turn up the latest research on some out-there topics isn't anywhere near as bad as the millions of dollars the CIA spent on resarching some of these areas back in the day.

      As for your other point - I basically agree with you. People always say "stop your bitching and do something" - well, I did, I donated thousands of dollars, I voted, and I got several friends to vote for Kerry, and made a case to anybody who would listen. Now I get to throw rocks for the next four years. I was a little afraid that if Kerry won and fucked up, I'd have to admit to being part of that mistake.

  80. Absurd! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aircraft that radar can't see? Impossible!!

  81. Results by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Results from this research could potentialy show that the Q-Ray bracelet actually relieves backpain... so, it's not a total waste.

  82. Missed opportunity... by beeplet · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I can't believe that a serious report would put psychic teleportation on the same scientific grounds as quantum entanglement... Quantum physics has produced plenty of weird and wonderful phenomena, but not all strange experimental results are equally credible (or incredible). The author seems to have no sense of scientific skepticism. These two quotes jumped out at me:


    "A comprehensive literature search for vm-Teleportation within the genre of spacetime metric engineering yielded no results. No one in the general relativity community has thought to apply the Einstein field equation whether there are solutions compatible with the concept of teleportation."


    (Or maybe the idea simply hasn't gotten by peer-reviewed publications?)


    "The conditions for fraud and sleight of hand [in the psychic teleportation experiments] were totally eliminated, and multiple independent outside witnesses (technical and military-intelligence experts) were present at all times to ensure total fidelity of the experiments."


    (Sure... Isn't that what they all say?)

    I guess it might be worthwhile in a very preliminary report to give all of the options equal consideration, but to suggest that they all deserve funding for further research makes the study kind of pointless. I wonder if they people who commissioned this report can actually take it seriously?
  83. Star Trek teleportation seems analog, not digital. by zipwow · · Score: 1

    From what I heard on the Star Trek shows, it always seemed to me that the process was analog, not digital, and not duplicatable.

    This gets you around that nasty #5, especially if the only known process of *creating* those analog signals that can be reconstructed involves the destruction of the molecules in the first place. That's what I always inferred from the occasional danger of sending things this way: lose the beam in the middle of transfer, and you've lost the person. Or at least a significant part of them.

    Analog makes sense because it carries a near-infinite amount of information, to a point where you can't capture the data by sampling. Also, capture attempts of some aspects may disrupt the other aspects. The reconstruction process may well be different from the data-capture process. The reconstruction process could be yet another field-interaction effect, which doesn't generally serve to record data, for example.

    Much of this I've made up as I went along, but I think for an explanation of a fictional device, it works well enough.

    -Zipwow

    --
    I don't know which is more depressing, that 2/3 didn't care enough to vote, or that 1/2 of those that did are crazy.
  84. sounds like the Soviet Union by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    back during the Cold War, there were a lot of Soviet programs in this sort of thing, and other pseudo-science fields.

    you can find a lot by yahoo searching for Scalar Weapons which is a system suposedly developed in the 60s and 50s which the USSR can use to control the weather, and used to shoot down the Challenger space shuttle.

    remote viewing in the CIA is something that's on the Discovery channel on cable all the time -- also shows about crop circles, UFOS, and "psychic profilers" solving murder mysteries

    similar quackery was investigated by the Nazi scientists who were deeply into the occult and other "black arts" including the flat earth society and the hollow earthers (how do you reconcile those two groups? flat and hollow??)

    In fact, a squad of Nazi troops took a super large cannon/gun out to an island in the middle of the ocean and tried shooting STRAIGHT UP trying to shoot across the "hollow earth" center to rain shells down on London. It didn't work.

    1. Re:sounds like the Soviet Union by Sentry21 · · Score: 1

      In fact, a squad of Nazi troops took a super large cannon/gun out to an island in the middle of the ocean and tried shooting STRAIGHT UP trying to shoot across the "hollow earth" center to rain shells down on London. It didn't work.

      Haha, that's so Wile E. Coyote it's got to be true. I can just see all these comically-drawn Nazis putting a pile of birdseed on a bridge over the Thames, then only moments later, running around as a large shadow quickly envelops them, and then WHAM! Back to the drawing board.

      --Dan

    2. Re:sounds like the Soviet Union by wkitchen · · Score: 0
      similar quackery was investigated by the Nazi scientists who were deeply into the occult and other "black arts" including the flat earth society and the hollow earthers (how do you reconcile those two groups? flat and hollow??)
      That's easy. It's a cube.
    3. Re:sounds like the Soviet Union by mr_snarf · · Score: 0

      Heh. I remember we had to give a talk on something random in our English Lit. class. I talked about how the earth was a trianglular prism (or some shape like that). The teacher was a flat-earther. I used lots of techno-babble and came out with a rather convincing explanation :P Certainly made the teacher look like an idiot.

      --
      printf("Goodbye cruel world!\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b");
    4. Re:sounds like the Soviet Union by gl4ss · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      *Kinda like this blatant attempt at extolling your own intellect does you?*

      well, dunno.

      flat earthers tend to look like idiots no matter what.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    5. Re:sounds like the Soviet Union by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      re: Nazi "experiment"

      They didn't actually launch a shell. Y'see, the distance was beyond the range of their artillery. ;-)

      What they actually did was try to set up an espionage operation with mirrors/telescope.

      It's a good thing that they wasted so many of their resources on such quackery.

    6. Re:sounds like the Soviet Union by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha! So you profess to know the secrets of the time cube do you? but do you know that in any one day there are four days? NO! Because you are brainstupid and you word-murder your children. Go back to your round-earth theory. you are too stupid for the secrets of the time cube.

  85. Doom 3 Anyone? by CharAznable · · Score: 1

    I just hope they move their teleportation research to Mars under the understanding that there won't be a reinforcements fleet coming if anything goes wrong!

    --
    The perfect sig is a lot like silence, only louder
    1. Re:Doom 3 Anyone? by arodland · · Score: 1

      Is that why they're so anxious to go there? So they can build their secret research bases and open the gates to hell? It all makes sense now!

  86. "If they can put a man on the moon..." by nusratt · · Score: 0

    ...and spend money on psy projects,
    then why can't the USA get standardized, reliable, auditable voting procedures & infrastructure?

  87. Biological counterargument to psychic phenomena by G4from128k · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If telekinesis, ESP, etc. were biologically possible, it would have been evolved by some creatures already. Imagine the incredible advantage a predator would have if it could read the mind of the prey and know that the prey was hiding behind a tree or that the prey was about to jog to the right or left. Or what if a predator (or prey) could telekinetically cause a stick to trip its opponent. Yet, no animal (or plant) seems to have such powers.

    It is unlikely that humanity is unique in have some never-before evolved power. The more scientists study animals, the more they find that humans are not qualitatively different from other creatures, only quantitatively different. Other creatures can count, create tools, have emotions, participate in social structures, practice deception, be aware of what others might think or do, etc. We exhibit these properties to a greater degree than do animals, but we are not unique. (In fact if humans did have psychic power, they would have little need for social systems, tools, etc. because psychic power would let them snare prey/beings with lesser powers.)

    Finally, we find no "physical" basis for psychic power. The four forces of gravity, eletromagnetism, the weak force, and the strong force do not provide a basis for psychic power. It is unlikely that some magic biologically created material could manifest and manipulate some unknown fifth force without either biologists, chemists, or physicists becoming aware of it..

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
    1. Re:Biological counterargument to psychic phenomena by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are apparently not aware of the work by Rupert Sheldrake that indicates very strongly that dogs know when their owners are coming home via some sort of extra sensory means, even when the owners change their schedule to trick the dog.

    2. Re:Biological counterargument to psychic phenomena by syukton · · Score: 1

      We can't find a "physical" basis for consciousness either, but that doesn't mean we're all unconscious. To believe that matter and matter alone (ie, what's on the periodic table) is all that governs our existence is preposterous. To believe that only 50 years after splitting the atom we know everything about how the universe is put together is hyperbole, pure and simple.

      It is unlikely that some magic biologically created material could manifest and manipulate some unknown fifth force without either biologists, chemists, or physicists becoming aware of it..

      What is thought? Is thought a force? Can you quantify thought in terms of chemicals or atoms? What about an idea? Don't keep thinking inside the box, you're liable to hurt someone.

      --
      Reinvent the wheel only at either a lower cost, greater effectiveness, or your own personal enrichment and satisfaction.
    3. Re:Biological counterargument to psychic phenomena by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So I guess you wouldn't pick up a ten dollar bill that was lying in the street because you know it can't exist because someone would have picked it up already?

    4. Re:Biological counterargument to psychic phenomena by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First of all, I am certainly not saying that psychic teleportation has any merit; actually, most of this is rather funny. However, the comment "If telekinesis, ESP, etc. were biologically possible, it would have been evolved by some creatures already." is flawed to say the least as is "It is unlikely that some magic biologically created material could manifest and manipulate some unknown fifth force without either biologists, chemists, or physicists becoming aware of it.." Why assume that the first time a creature displays a specific ability is something that had to occur in the past? Just because something hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean it never will. And scientists not being aware of something shouldn't surprising at all. There were, after all, those that believed the earth was flat.

  88. A waste by DarkOx · · Score: 1

    How can any sane person call this a waste imagine an army that does not have to penetrate defense or break lines, but simply appears in the ememies capital building an wipes out all their officals. No more messy battle field campains. Someone Clearly out numbered? easy just beam the enitre division off the field to some safe location, or better yet right behind the enimes back.

    Oh wait this is reality you say? shoot so much for all my big plans then,.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
  89. So what I'm seeing is that... by HarryCaul · · Score: 1

    The report cost $25,000 and recommended $7.5 million, but I see no evidence the Air Force authorized spending the $7.5 million.

    I guess you could argue that it's worth spending $25,000 to have a report on the subject on file, just so it's out there for reference. If only so you know it's something you don't want to spend any more money on. It's a little silly, but it's not insanely ridiculous or anything.

    As long as they don't actually fund the $7.5 million, that is.

  90. Only Michael would post this submission. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even Timothy would have shaken his head in despair and clicked on the 'reject' button.

    Slashdot will not have any relevance or respect until it starts kicking the clowns out of its so-called editorial department.

  91. Don't need to do this by jgardn · · Score: 1

    Nope, they wouldn't need to do this. A lot of things that the military and CIA and FBI spend money on aren't on the public budget. Sometimes, even congresscritters can't get a hold of it. The way it works is the military asks for a ton of money for research and development on projects. They don't even explain what they project is, except to say that it is in the interests of national security, yadda, yadda, yadda.

    Congress and the president are willing to set aside a few percent of the total military budget for this kind of research. Sure, it may not have great oversight at the time, but eventually they have to publicize what they did with the money.

    This is probably just one of those instances.

    --
    The radical sect of Islam would either see you dead or "reverted" to Islam.
  92. Psychic Teleportation by CyanDisaster · · Score: 5, Funny

    In the report, author Eric Davis says psychic teleportation, moving yourself from location to location through mind powers, is "quite real and can be controlled."

    Yeah. It's called 'walking.' Or am I looking at it totally wrong?

    Hope be with ye,
    Cyan

  93. Refrences Uri Geller by ch-chuck · · Score: 1

    Might be a clever hoax. Uri Geller (mentioned on page 56) has already been debunked by James Randi

    If for real, should be great fodder for CSICOP (Commitee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal) which once boasted Carl Sagan, etc.

    But the way they press all the 'psychic' buttons suggests an elaborate hoax.

    --
    try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
  94. Out in Nevada... by CaverChris · · Score: 1

    Did anyone else catch the location of the study? Las Vegas, Edwards AFB? Just next door to supersecret Area 51. I'm not exactly a tin-foil hat guy, but I think that's a bit interesting... Definitely some odd stuff going on out there.

  95. Basic theory of English -- get a spellchecker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will they also tell you anything about spelling, or literacy?

    It never fails to amaze me how people who read all day fail to pick up basic english skills. I guess if you're just the doorman at the symphony, you don't automatically get a better ear for music. It's probably your fault if you don't, though.

    You averaged 2.4 misspellings per paragraph. Not a record on /., but pretty embarassing all the same. Ever think about getting some education? Or at least a spellchecker? Kudos on "axiom" and "deterministic", I guess, but maybe you want to start on "completely"?

    Your listing, sir:
    redundent = redundant
    controling = controlling
    compleatly = completely (which you took the time to bold)
    nessiary = necissary
    nessisarly = necissarily
    belives = believes
    falce = false
    gready = greedy
    anti-seminism = anti-semitism
    mater = matter
    inpossible = impossible
    probibly = probably

    1. Re:Basic theory of English -- get a spellchecker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You averaged 2.4 misspellings per paragraph. Not a record on /., but pretty embarassing all the same. Ever think about getting some education? Or at least a spellchecker? Kudos on "axiom" and "deterministic", I guess, but maybe you want to start on "completely"?

      Embarrassing indeed.

      nessiary = necissary
      nessisarly = necissarily


      Sorry, better luck next time. That's all the time we have for today's episode of Slashdot Grammar Trollbusters. Be sure to tune in tomorrow's exciting episode!

    2. Re:Basic theory of English -- get a spellchecker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could use a lesson yourself: nessiary = necissary = necessary. sheesh.

  96. Teleportation and Dubya by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If only they could teleport some brains into Dubya's head ....

  97. Power consumption of the human brain... by mikael · · Score: 1

    From an article I once read:

    The power consumption of the human brain is around 20 watts, while the power consumption of the human body is 100 watts. As there are 100 billion neurons in the brain, power consumption for a single neuron is around 0.5 - 4 nanoWatts. Compare this to the peak power output of a mobile phone, which is around 1-2 watts.

    It's already possible to detect a heartbeat remotely using a electric sensor sensitive enough to detect a heartbeat from 1 metre away.

    If this can work with the electric field contained within the heart, then perhaps it is also possible to detect the electric field caused by the neurons of the visual system, although you'd need some really complex signal processing.

    Interestingly, most of the cases of "remote viewing" claimed by people close to death, always involve having the brain being cooled down to hypothermia levels. Perhaps this reduces the "thermal noise" and sensory noise in the brain.

    --
    Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
  98. Out of the interest of science... by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

    The fact that this research will prove or disprove this phenomenon is scientific progress if of itself. It may be bogus at first glance. But what IF they do find something. Such a notion would be both anoying to our current thinking of the universe and how it works. But, it also allows for the possibilities of much grander research projectst that would yield yet more data.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
  99. Welcomed by XSforMe · · Score: 1

    Well, considering that most military spending is destined to end up in some rather nasty technologies, I welcome that they throw away their money into a dead end path.

    Somebody once pointed out the date the militaries took charge of ARPA, as the turning point of U.S. technological leadership in the world. News like this seem to confirm this theory.

    --
    My other OS is the MCP!
  100. For you Bush "fans", this is what happens... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is what happens when you have a president that believe that god talks to him.

    you get a guy who believes in the supernatural, psychic phenomena, evil spirits, demons, gods, heaven and hell.

    All of this is fine if you believe, I have no quarrel, but you run a government without the aid and guidance of religion.

  101. Very Convincing by Goosey · · Score: 1

    Your arguments are very convincing.

    It must be the liberal (*grin*) use of capitalization and the excessive exclamation marks following evil and bitch.

    Changing the 'of' to 'a' was also a good move. In fact the whole random and unnecessary first line is great.

    I don't know how anyone could fail to take you seriously.

    --
    --- "End Of Line" - MCP
  102. Deep space Radar Telemetry by mailman-zero · · Score: 2, Funny
    "...struck a raw nerve with physicists and critics of wasteful military spending."
    Just wait until they hear about the SGC and the rest of the Stargate program!
    --
    Let's play video games with mailmanZERO
  103. Interesting quote in article by Chagatai · · Score: 1
    "Scientists were able to ascertain that at least one individual was able to teleport within line-of-sight, but left an odd odor in the room upon doing so, accompanied by an odd noise. One scientist said that, 'It sounded like a BAMF!'"

    --
    --Chag
  104. Didn't your mom teach you? by PhoenixOne · · Score: 1
    You should say "Thank you" when somebody does something for you. You ask for examples and he gave them to you.

    I will give you credit for saying "please" in your first post however.

    --
    Spell cheek you've failed me four the last thyme!
  105. This is why people "volunteer" on campaigns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I know of a guy who spent the last 4 months working full time for free on the Bush campaign.

    Now he's starting a software company which will make "national security" software and use connections to get the gov't to pay for it.

    It's a risk-- if Kerry won he would have wasted that time. But he's expecting at least a $100G buyout now.

    Ahh, the complex world of money we live in....

  106. Not Star Trek by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    That's exactly how it doesn't work.

    The energy from the original is delivered to the destination, soul intact, or whathaveyou.

    Remember, most of the time there's no receiving station.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    1. Re:Not Star Trek by MisterClever · · Score: 1
      That's exactly how it doesn't work.

      Sorry... I wasn't clear. I wasn't saying that's how teleporters claimed to work in the Star Trek world... I was saying that that's how the author of the book suggested a teleporter might actually work if you could ever build the thing (i.e. "Star Trek teleporters can't work the way they describe but here's one model"), if you could ever get past the whole "building something out of atoms" business (not to mention the vaporizing the person part.)

      Remember, most of the time there's no receiving station.

      However, they do use a receiving station when one's available... Not sure if it's just polite or if there's a real reason, i.e. slightly safer.

  107. Re:It's a joke - No It's Not by tabdelgawad · · Score: 1

    First, the pdf is posted on the FAS website. The Federation of American Scientist is *not* a joke organization. Second, this is based on a USA Today story here:

    http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2004-11-05-tel ep ortation_x.htm

    Now, USA Today is not exactly a paragon of reliable news, but the reporter seems to have contacted the Air Force Research Lab and gotten a reply.

    So no, it's not a joke.

    --
    Imposing Libertarian views on everyone online since 1992.
  108. Did anyone... by neutz · · Score: 2, Informative
    try the phone number listed in the document?

    Frank B. Mead, Jr.
    (661) 275-5929

  109. And JMS/B5 by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    That's OK, King ripped off Alfred Bester and JMS ripped off "Alfred Bester".

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  110. Make your money *disappear* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On the other hand, maybe they're going to upgrade the faith-based missile defense system with a quantum tunneling approach.

    Just arm the kinetic energy kill vehicle, and wait for it to *tunnel* into the launched warhead which is flying to North America.

    Or maybe they could produce trillions of nano-scale KE kill vehicles. And wait for one of those to quantum tunnel its way into the oncoming warhead. The odds would be better that way.

  111. RE: For the love of... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Having worked at AFRL, I can tell you that this is probably a real report. However, it is a study done by a small business, probably what is commonly called an SBIR. The study itself cost somewhere around $100k, and the results will be used to determine if further study is justified.

    These contracts produce wildly varied output quality. Some is amazing, some is crap, but the program is part pork (funding small startups) and part science, so you get what you pay for. The amounts presented in the paper are recommendations by the contractor based on their opinions. It is not necessarily what AFRL is going to put their money into. Actually, AFRL has not nearly enough money to pay for further research into this risky a field at those dollars. Groups like AFOSR, DARPA, perhaps. But AFRL funded $1M programs are reserved for stuff that is closer to reality and the warfighter.

    AFRL _is_ a reputable funding agency, but this document is not representative of their work. And the marketing speak is an inherent part of this kind of paper, since it is a pitch by the contractor to continue funding them for further investigation.

  112. Spider Sense by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    If telekinesis, ESP, etc. were biologically possible, it would have been evolved by some creatures already.

    Geez, don't you ever get out to the movies?

    Actually, as I understand it, spiders have fast nerve signaling - fast enough that their reactions are faster than your perception, so they look prescient.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  113. Does this surprise anyone..... by GeSchmidtt · · Score: 1

    .... From recent polls it seems that more people believe in the Virgin Birth than in evolution.

    The same people think that having un-auditable electronic voting machines sold by, operated and maintained by private corporations whoes only obligation is to share holders, would provide clean and honest vote returns!

    Belief is a powerful thing.

  114. There is no such thing as chaos by DigiShaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Some would say that there really is not such thing is chaos in the universe. But rather, the notion of chaos is nothing more then order beyond comprehension. That said, maybe consciousness has some form of predictable order to it and thus we really don't have free will. If this is the case, the being psychic is nothing more then a higher level of thought for the sub-conscious process more of the chaos around us.

    Just a thought ;)

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
    1. Re:There is no such thing as chaos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Just a thought ;)

      I disagree. I didn't detect an actual thought in there. Time to take your meds.

  115. Teleporting myself to bed at last ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    moving yourself from location to location through mind powers -- well to the point I dare say. Where can I pick up the cheque?

  116. No evidence? by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

    Have you even looked?

  117. Stuff we don't know. by minus23 · · Score: 1, Informative

    I'm inclined to believe there is a miriad of stuff we don't know about but is *very* important to our future. There may be good reasons the general populous isn't briefed... but we can only guess really. Check out this link here that goes through reponses that Military Generals and Presidents have given in response to questions asking them about being briefed on UFO's. http://www.earthfiles.com/news/news.cfm?ID=819&cat egory=Science

  118. atomic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's possible and has been done.. on atomic level. Now go get read some propaganda..

  119. Hey, it works !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hell, it MUST work; they successfully sent Bush's brain to a jar in a biology lab at Texas A&M

  120. CIA by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

    Actually, I read about this in a book by someone at Janes.

    CIA and KGB have both used remote viewing for decades and CIA cut the program in the early 90s, then hired back everyone and renamed the program as something Black.

    Basicly the end of the Cold War allowed folks at CIA to see for themselves what the Soviets did and they were shocked at how accurate the remote viewing was.

    I think it's whacky, but those are the facts as I've read them from no whacky sources.

    1. Re:CIA by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      In reality the CIA looked at it and were shocked at what utter bullshit it was. Sure, they spent some dollars, then stopped. There is absolutely no need to try to more dollars to disprove what has already been disproved many times.

    2. Re:CIA by dbIII · · Score: 1
      Basicly the end of the Cold War allowed folks at CIA to see for themselves what the Soviets did and they were shocked at how accurate the remote viewing was.
      Don't tell me - they would have found Bin Laden but they were jammed by a whole lot of Sufi mystics.

      Disclaimer - Sufis are as likely to work with Bin Laden as vampire aardvarks from Timbuktu.

  121. String Theory? by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

    It still hasn't been tested you know. Its an interesting mathematical model of how our universe *might* work. Its very cool and very interesting but no one really knows if it describes reality.

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    1. Re:String Theory? by tabrnaker · · Score: 1

      then again, relativity and quantum mechanics are testable models with accurate predictions that we know do not describe reality. Otherwise there wouldn't be two theories. Unless of course we live in a multi-dimensional universe, in which case both relativity and quantum mechanics can describe reality. Wait, isn't that string theory?

  122. Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From what I understand she ballooned up to like 190 lbs like a lot of hot goth babes. They don't typically stay hot for long.

  123. Ban the by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Farting Cow.

    Does this really suprise anyone, anymore?

  124. Teleportation is painful by Striker770S · · Score: 1

    To study psychic teleportation, the scientists should study those tricky displacement beasts, although they may want to have a few fighters and a cleric with them, because those bastards hurt. but seriously, possibly electron tunneling effect has some sort of toll on the whole instantaneous travel because electrons are the only known particals that can be anywhere at a single instant, although with an extremely low (rounding to 0%) possibility of where you want that electron to be.

    --
    I thought what I'd do was, I'd pretend I was one of those deaf-mutes. - Catcher in the Rye
  125. When was this thing written? by h4x0r-3l337 · · Score: 2, Informative

    The date on this report says august 2004, but on page 31 it says "The largest commercially available computers can store 40 gigabytes on a single hard drive."

  126. Great flipping Cthulhu on a pogo stick... by zunger · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, the section on wormholes is 90% kosher. He even goes so far as to calculate the amount of exotic matter needed to create such a wormhole, and seems to have read most of Visser's (excellent) book on the physics of them.

    It might have helped had the authors of this report read the rest of Visser, however. Such as the calculations showing that exotic matter is intrinsically quantum-mechanically unstable, to the extent that such a wormhole will collapse within a time strictly less than the time it takes for a light signal to get through said wormhole.

    Which is good, because teleportation by wormhole lets information travel faster than light and is therefore equivalent to building a time machine.

    I really hope that we don't have our government funding research into time machines. Because then this is going to start sounding like a very bad movie plot.

    1. Re:Great flipping Cthulhu on a pogo stick... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      actually, this project will be successfull.
      Clearly all those people talking to 'nobody' are just hearing voice from the future.

      Not THAT sounds like a bad movie plot.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  127. No one else listened to the Art Bell show? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I must be the only slashdotter that listened to the Art Bell show, and frequent guest Ed Dames. "Psychic teleportation" sounds like nothing more and nothing less than astral projection.

    Is this November, or April? (April would explain Tuesday pretty well, but I digress.)

  128. Re:Star Trek teleportation seems analog, not digit by Moofie · · Score: 1

    They made two Rikers. Both were obnoxious.

    --
    Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
  129. Al Gore - the manchurian candidate? by jrpascucci · · Score: 0
    Did anybody notice this little section, on page 59?

    The U.S. response to Soviet psychotronics R&D programs was the Remote Viewing program. In addition, the U.S. Army began the JEDI Project in 1983, which sought to increase human potential using teachable models of behavioral/physical excellent by unconventional means (Alexander et al., 1990). The JEDI Project was essentially a human-performance modeling experiment based on neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) skills, whereby advanced influence technologies to model excellence in human performance was used. The program ran under the auspices of the Army INSCOM and the Organizational Effectiveness School, and was sponsored by a U.S. government interagency task force. Finally, it should be pointed out that the program had successfully trained several hundred people, including members of Congress (such as Al Gore, Jr. and Tom Downey), before being terminated.

    1. Re:Al Gore - the manchurian candidate? by Mark+of+THE+CITY · · Score: 1

      If so, it obviously didn't work...

      --
      The clearance system sounds logical. It is not. It is completely arbitrary. -- John Bolton
  130. MOD PARENT UP its on topic!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    why is this modded -1?? did you people read the article?? its smash on topic.

    "Joseph said that the MPs had basically gone straight from McDonald's to Abu Ghraib. They knew nothing. And now they were getting scapegoated because they happened to be identifiable in the photographs. They just did what the Military Intelligence people, Joseph's people, told them to do. PsyOps were just a phone call away, Joseph said. And the Military Intelligence people all had PsyOps training anyway. The thing I had to remember about Military Intelligence was that they were the "nerdy-type guys at school. You know. The outcasts. Couple all that with ego, and a poster on the wall saying 'By CG Approval' - Commanding General Approval - and suddenly you have guys who think they govern the world. That's what one of them said to me. 'We govern the world.' ""

    and more importantly

    "He told me how in the mid-1980s Special Forces undertook a secret initiative, codenamed Project Jedi, to create super soldiers - soldiers with super powers. One such power was the ability to walk into a room and instantly be aware of every detail; that was level one.

    Level two, he said, was intuition - making correct decisions. "Somebody runs up to you and says, 'There's a fork in the road. Do we turn left or do we turn right?' And you go" - Glenn snapped his fingers - "We go right!"

    "What was the level above that?" I asked.

    "Invisibility," said Glenn. "After a while we adapted it to just finding a way of not being seen."

    "What was the level above invisibility?" I asked.

    "Uh," said Glenn. He paused for a moment. "We had a master sergeant who could stop the heart of a goat ... just by wanting the goat's heart to stop. He did it at least once."

    "Where did this happen?" I asked.

    "Down in Fort Bragg," he said, "at a place called Goat Lab." "


    seriously, its a really good read that has everything to do with "psychic warfare" and outlines some other aspects of military intelligence you might not be familiar with.
    the story about the guy trying to walk through the wall is so bizare i cant see how someone could make all that up.

  131. Missing link by Mister+Liberty · · Score: 1

    Teleport yourself to http://skepdic.com/ bjd

  132. The *august* report, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The *august* report, eh?

    Are you sure it wasn't the *april* report?

  133. OT: and Alfred Bester inspired Babylon 5 character by LarryWest42 · · Score: 1

    ... of the same name.

    The character was the Psi Corp leader, hunting down (other) telepaths. Played by Walter Koenig of the original Star Trek.

    http://www.oinc.net/B5/Enc/pcd/bester.html
  134. Re:Star Trek teleportation seems analog, not digit by StarKruzr · · Score: 1

    No, what he got wrong was Step 5, which actually occurs at the same time as Step 1.

    Still, it is the contentious bit.

    --

    +++ATH0
  135. Same thing for Telekinesis by Cyrgo · · Score: 0

    And don't forget Telekinesis!

    Many people are not aware, but we all use it to some degree everyday! In fact, I'm using it right now to write this message!
    For example: when I want to press the "W" key, my mind concentrates on that action, sends an electrical pulse to the muscles in my arms, which in turn make one of my fingers hit that key... and voila! Telekinesis! Moving a key with your mind is easy!

  136. yeah but kerry is a traitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    shut your trap, you dirty democrat!

  137. Black Projects & Black Holes ... by quarkscat · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The people who coughed up the money for
    these dubious "projects" should be put up
    against a wall and shot. (That is one tax-
    payer expense I would be happy to cover.)

    But the previous /. poster is correct --
    really, really assinine projects are often
    a cover to fund other "black" projects.
    The "Iran Hostage/Exchanged For/Military
    Spare Parts" quickly morphed into covert
    funding for the Contras. Once a big chunk
    of money is "off the books", it becomes much
    easier to hide from the US Congress and the
    taxpayer. In the past, our "government-
    within-a-government" has used such methods
    to fund the assassination of Latin American
    leaders, the overthrow of governments, and
    even an invasion or two (Bay of Pigs?).

    Considering how money earmarked for the war
    against terror in Afghanistan was siphoned
    off for the run-up to the war in Iraq, one might
    ask exactly where has the huge sum of money
    earmarked for the reconstruction of Iraq gone?
    It sure hasn't gone to where the US Congress
    earmarked it. Consider all the internet
    "background chatter" from neo-cons regarding
    Venezuela, the "oil worker revolt" there, and
    the recall election that Chavez won. The over-
    throw of a left-of-center regime that has had
    the temerity to support Castro's Cuba with
    cheap oil sounds like a bonafide Bush/Cheney
    operation.

    Between the veil of secrecy (post 9-11) and the
    USA Patriot Act (I), not much info slips into
    the press to cause public blowback. If you
    try to begome a "whistleblower" on some of these
    shennanigans, you are likely to disappear into
    Gitmo Bay (not unlike the "vanished" in
    Argentina).

  138. Waste of money? by Tired+and+Emotional · · Score: 1

    The first thing they should have spent some money on was a server that couldn't be slash dotted!

    --
    Squirrel!
  139. patch -p1 by LouisvilleDebugger · · Score: 1

    if (!person.name.equals("George W Bush"))
    {

    1) Scan you down to the atomic level
    2) Transmit the billions of petabytes of data to the receiving station
    3) Rebuild you from the atomic level-up from the transmitted data
    4) Confirm you'd been built correctly
    }
    5) Vaporize or otherwise annihilate the source person

    1. Re:patch -p1 by B1ackD0g · · Score: 1

      I believe there was an Outer Limits episode that followed those steps exactly. It was called "Think like a dinosaur". The entire episode revolved around a transport that had an uncertain completions status, so they weren't sure whether to kill the young lady involved. Pretty good episode.

      --
      When I'm feeling down, I like to whistle. It makes the neighbor's dog run to the end of his chain and gag himself.
    2. Re:patch -p1 by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Before it was a new Outer Limits episode (as opposed to the classic episodes), it was on Sci-Fi Channel's Seeing Ear Theater on their website. The dinosaurs in the audio drama emphasized the diea behind "balancing the equation" more than they did in the OL episode.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  140. We can't fund schools by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... But we can fund crap like this.

    This is fraud. Someone needs to be doing time in federal prison for this.

  141. Re:Spider Sense (and roaches and flies, oh my) by G4from128k · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually, as I understand it, spiders have fast nerve signaling - fast enough that their reactions are faster than your perception, so they look prescient.

    Very good point, many creatures do have "super-human" senses. The spider nerves are a great quantitative tweak on neuronal engineering - bigger diameter axons carry signals faster and the small size of spiders means the latencies are extremely low.

    Other creatures have abilities that seem near-psychic but are not when you study the creature further. Cockroaches have sensitive hairs on their tails that pick up the air pressure wave that precedes any subsonic moving object. Because the pressure wave travels at about 700 miles per hour (the speed of sound), the cockroach feels the swatter approaching long before it reaches the roach. As a double advantage the hairs are wired directly to the legs so the roach flees the instant something starts moving its way without "thinking."

    Flies have a 3-stage pipelined visual system that operates a 400 Hz (compared to human's 60 Hz system). They see the swatter and react more quickly than the human eye.

    Electric fish use an active electric field to map their surroundings in muddy water. Dolphins and bats use ultrasound. Mantis shrimp see 6 color bands and 4 polarizations. Pit vipers see far IR. Etc. All of these amazing examples rely on well know physics to let the animal sense what a human cannot.

    Geez, don't you ever get out to the movies?

    Unfortunately no! ;) I see most of my movies on the airplane. But I do find that reality is often much stranger than fiction, that scientists discover stuff that is more outrageous that anything Hollywood can dream up.

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
  142. First tests seem to work by nizo · · Score: 3, Funny

    It looks like Warp Drive Metrics has succeeded in teleporting $25,000 into their bank account from the taxpayers wallets; we shall see if future expirements are as successful.

  143. What immediately came to mind: by gotr00t · · Score: 1

    Wasn't this what they tried to do in Doom3?

  144. The Legacy of George W. Bush by Jagasian · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Lie, cheat, steal, and kill. Then use religion to control your populace.

  145. Remote Viewer on Art Bell Show says don't worry by dmh20002 · · Score: 2, Funny

    On the Art Bell Show, Major Ed Dames, a reknowed remote viewer, (you can spend a few $100 and take his class) used remote viewing to determine that the world will end in 2 years when a massive solar flare scorches everything. So don't worry about the wasted money. it doesn't matter anyway.

  146. Re:Biological argument: sign of a psychic predator by ankhank · · Score: 1

    Well, if there's a competent psychic predator out there, what evidence would you expect?

    Evidence of absence is not absence of evidence.

    Particularly when it's a body gone missing.

    Google for "unsolved disappearances":

    Results ... about 846

    Nope, I didn't see anything either.

    _gulp_ _munch_

  147. What for? by Pentrite · · Score: 3, Funny

    I don't get it, if they manage to discover how teleportation works, they will lose their jobs, as G. W. B. wont need airplanes anymore to bomb whoever he wants...

    1. Re:What for? by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      Don't worry too much... I'm sure the approved method will involve billion dollar psychic amplifiers for decades while private commercial developers work on miniaturizing it and making it into viable off-the-shelf mix and match components ;-p

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
  148. Closed minded psuedo-intellectuals-Visection. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Someday, if someone does discover psychic or telekinetic abilities and they can reproduce them under controlled conditions, scientists will be lining up to study them and try to learn more about how it works."

    Oh joy. Lab rat. You guys have cold hands.

  149. Where do I apply for funding by earthforce_1 · · Score: 1

    I think I might be able to find Bin Laden with my tarot cards and trusty ouija board. I just need a $500K/year 10 year research grant. Hey, you never know right?

    Damn, I want a ticket on that gravy train.

    --
    My rights don't need management.
  150. Biological psychic countermeasures by G4from128k · · Score: 1

    Well, if there's a competent psychic predator out there, what evidence would you expect?

    Evidence of absence is not absence of evidence.


    You allude to an important counterargument here. What if some predator evolved psychic powers. Why couldn't the prey evolve countermeasures. Perhaps encrypted/scrambled neural energies might confuse a predator, a psychic blast might stun the predator, or a psychic damping field might suppress local telekinetic abilities. Of course, if an evolutionary psychic power arms race were to occur, then biologists would see evidence of that. Strange hyper-developed organs or specialized tissues would leave scientists scratching their heads until they discovered that animals with bigger mystery organs could read minds and animals that lacked the organs became easy prey.

    The point is that evolution has had a very long time to uncover what can be done with carbon-based life and electrochemical systems. Were psychic powers possible, it seems unlikely that they would only appear in people and only appear at such a tenuous level that repeatable studies are hard to do. Psychic powers confer a strong evolutionary advantage and evolution is very very good at amplifying any advantage. Were it possible, it should be much more widespread and much more obvious.


    Nope, I didn't see anything either.

    On the other-hand (with tinfoil hat on head), perhaps our psychic overlords don't want us to be aware of psychic powers. Any human that seems to show psychic abilities becomes tormented and marginalized until the mainstream ignores them and their evidence.

    We shall see.... Or perhaps we won't........

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
    1. Re:Biological psychic countermeasures by TheLink · · Score: 1

      What do you think of
      So maybe they already have evolved it. Maybe it's just not as developed (or the countermeasures have also developed).

      Who knows maybe that's also part of evolution - which is why certain things evolve the way they do - because it's needed in the future - so it looks like creation to creationists ;).

      Over billions of years animals getting a prescient gut feel - "this mate is not for me/ this mate is for me", so there might be a prescient sense. However you have to take into account the other animals who also have prescient gut feel out to eat your descendents too.

      Coz AFAIK all the animals are kinda in the same boat and descended from the same ancestors, so any such sixth sense could be just because they're all linked - destinies intertwined. You might not get the gut feel that something is about to eat you if overall it's part of the big plan for you to be eaten...

      Maybe we won't be able to be prescient with aliens from another world - won't know if the aliens are "staring at" us.

      BTW if you're talking about psychic powers, I don't see why one should assume the "organs" involved should all be in this world. The interfaces maybe, as is the scientists are still scratching their heads over how the brains work etc.

      When I last checked scientists don't even know what 90% of the universe's mass or energy is. So the stuff we consider normal is actually abnormal.

      Also: scientists have NOT explained the very FIRST observation each of them ever makes- consciousness/self-awareness.

      e.g. recursive future-sense.

      --
  151. Re:Spider Sense (and roaches and flies, oh my) by LittleLebowskiUrbanA · · Score: 1

    That was one of the best posts I've ever seen on Slashdot. Fascinating. Thanks for the info. (marksG4from128k as a friend).

  152. Proof of Theocracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look at the bottom of your google link:

    a political unit governed by a deity (or by officials thought to be divinely guided)
    www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn

    Look at these links:

    http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0317-10.htm

    and look at the last paragraph of this article,

    http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?i te mNo=310788&contrassID=2&subContrassID=1&sbSubContr assID=0&listSrc=Y

    Now you tell me if the definition fits or not

  153. Go for it! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps we will get some cool movies out of the effort, similar to all of those psychic sci-fi/horror movies of 70's, peaking with Ghostbusters in the early 80's.

  154. Mod parent up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is exactly how Department of Defense funding works; any funds left over from the previous fiscal year are lost. August and September are the months that normally tight-fisted government types suddenly start dumping money into pencils, reams of paper, electric shoe-shiners, hatracks...anything that will bring their remaining funds down to $0.00 for October 1 (the first day of the U.S. Government fiscal year).

  155. Scientists have one major flaw by bigberk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    (And I say this as an Electrical Engineer). Established, respected experts in a field are among the most reluctant to consider radically new ideas. Major shifts in science have occurred when some young oddball found a new way to look at an old problem, or an outsider to the field found a new link that was never considered before. Consider the significant (albeit slow) revolution in medicine that is increasingly acknowledging the mind/body connection. Placebo treatments that actually have physiological healing effects; patients that exert conscious control over the failing processes in their bodies.

    Now I'm not saying that necessarily this teleportation stuff has any merit. I just want to point out that if you're quick to say "what crap" then you might have fallen into the trap that leads minds to stagnate; that is, to believe that existing human knowledge is complete.

    If there's one thing we can bet on, it's that human knowledge is far from complete and we are far from understanding the true nature of things. We are naive creatures with limited understandings of things. Perhaps the military is more willing to gamble funding in new directions, because unlike academics their main goal isn't to protect their researching asses for the rest of their lives. Their goal is to develop new tools that the enemy doesn't have.

    1. Re:Scientists have one major flaw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      You know what's the big problem with the "My ideas are kept down by the 'establishment' scientists because they'd have to re-learn everything & admit their ignorance" argument? It doesn't work that way. Whenever some revolutionary idea (like the big ones that came before paradigm shifts were invented) is born, the first people to embrace it are the ones who learn it, apply it to the "easiest" problems, and get to pick the low-hanging fruit of papers, jobs, and Nobel prizes.

      There are *plenty* of things that are worth researching and have a microgram of plausibility. When we've exhausted all those, by all means, let's go back and re-confirm the nonexistence of perpetual motion machines, etc.

    2. Re:Scientists have one major flaw by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      Every now and then I point out to someone how preposterous Relativity would have sounded a couple hundred years ago.

      We need to quit believing we already know everything.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    3. Re:Scientists have one major flaw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Heh - I like to point out how our common belongings of today like cutlery and dinnerware would have been worth a King's ransom a thousand years ago :)

      Off-topic but tangentially related. (And I get a kick out of telling people that Queen owns several pieces of jewellery that are made of aluminium... when they were made, bauxite was difficult to mine, and thus it was a precious metal)

      Okay - no point... just funny how things change.

    4. Re:Scientists have one major flaw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but it would also have sounded preposterous two hundred years ago had you told people the Sun was pulled across the sky every day by chariot.

      This guy isn't drilling for oil in a new frontier; he's doing it in the living room of a high-rise apartment.

    5. Re:Scientists have one major flaw by nickco3 · · Score: 1

      All the really good new theories are developed by new boys to the field in their twenties. The three classic examples of the paradigm shift, Copernicus, Newton, Einstein all fit this model. The immediate converts to the new theory will also be in their twenties.

      Scientists have pet theories, just like Slashdotters have pet OSes. And just like everyone else they get old and stuck in their ways, and less likely to embrace new thinking. The aging and dying of old, established scientists is an important factor in new theories gaining acceptance. Einstein is a another good example: he had the balls to overturn Newtonian thinking in his youth, but refused to have anything to do with the new quantum theory when he got older. It clashed with his (pet) theory of Relativity, so he couldn't accept it.

      --
      -- Nick "Hallo this is Beel Gates, und I pronounce weendows as ... WEENdows"
  156. Teleportation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First they plan to go to Mars, then they research teleportation...

    UAC here we come!

    1. Re:Teleportation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shucks, CharAznable was quicker. :(
      I thought I would be the first to see this connection...

  157. Psychic Teleportation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you out of your mind?!?

  158. I tried to post this one last week by geomon · · Score: 1

    This is the American Physical Society's "What's New" newsletter from Bob Parks for October 29th, 2004

    Check out Item 1.

    --
    "Rocky Rococo, at your cervix!"
  159. Constitutional amendment proposal by Barlo_Mung_42 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    His proposal to amend the constitution to make sure no state allows gay people to marry is purely driven by his warped reading of the bible. Never mind that Jesus never mentions homosexuality one way or the other.
    If that's not theocratic I don't know what is.

    1. Re:Constitutional amendment proposal by Barlo_Mung_42 · · Score: 1

      "IMHO: Sex is for reproduction. Marraige is to make legitimate children."

      This is the standard hypocritical drivel that these bigots roll out. So a man and a woman that can't have kids for medical reasons should not be able to marry either? Are you sure that you have only ever had sex with the intent of getting the woman pregnant? Yeah right. Oh, and if you don't like Jesus you are not Catholic.

    2. Re:Constitutional amendment proposal by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      The bible is quite clear on the notion of homosexuality. You'll find it in Leviticus. It's the same page as the instructions not to eat shellfish or animals with cloven hooves...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:Constitutional amendment proposal by lothar97 · · Score: 1
      And the Old Testiment [sic] said gays were bad.

      People who use the Bible to justify hatred of gays infuriate me to no end- yourself included. You claim to be religious, but you do not even know what the Bible says. Let an agnostic Unitarian Universalist correct you.

      Leviticus 18:22 states: "You shall not lie with a man as one lies with a woman, it is an abomination." OK. Word of God, eh? We should then follow EVERYTHING in Leviticus. No sense being selective. Leviticus 25:44-46 tells us that we can take slaves (gentiles only). Leviticus 19:20-22 also states that sex with an engaged slave is punished by an animal sacrifice at temple. Chapters 1-7 of Leviticus tell us the collection of laws relating to sacrifices, offerings, and the like.

      As for the "sex only for reproduction" thing, I guess you're referring to Genesis 38:7-10, and the story of Onan spilling his seed. So I guess all the things in Genesis are true, including the world being created in 6 days, the Tower of Babel, Methuselah lived to the age of 969, and Noah to 950.

      My point is, if you hold so close and dear that one specific passage is enough to base views/hatred/laws/etc, you need to give enough weight to all the other passages. Why are you allowed to choose some passages over others? The rest of us think you're just goofy for giving so much weight to something that is really just a good collection of stories designed to teach a moral code to uneducated people thousands of years ago.

      --

    4. Re:Constitutional amendment proposal by Barlo_Mung_42 · · Score: 1

      You said "Plus, fuck what Jesus said."

      Yeah. That's real admiration and respect.

  160. I already have this power by General+Alcazar · · Score: 2, Funny
    In the report, author Eric Davis says psychic teleportation, moving yourself from location to location through mind powers, is "quite real and can be controlled."

    I have tried to keep this a secret for as long as I have been able, but I guess the cat is out of the bag now. Just a few minutes ago, I was standing on the other side of the room from where I am now typing. With my mind, I told my body to move over to the other side of the room and immediately it happened! My body does whatever I tell it to! It is completely under my psychic control!

    For a while it was cool being the only one with this power, but now everyone is going to start doing it. Suxx azz.

    ga

  161. Dylithium! by Barlo_Mung_42 · · Score: 1

    To heck with the Stargate. Without dylithium we are never going to go anywhere. We need warp capability!

  162. Why must you mock me? by TiggertheMad · · Score: 4, Funny

    Eighty-three percent of American adults believe in the Virgin birth of Jesus Christ

    I resent the fact that you imply my beliefs are backwards and illogical. I think it makes perfect sense to believe that Jesus Christ was a virgin when he was born.

    STOP MOCKING ME!

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    1. Re:Why must you mock me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He came out of a blinkin' vagina, mate!

    2. Re:Why must you mock me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As long as he didn't come in it, I think it doesn't really count.

  163. The Rules by FrankDrebin · · Score: 1

    Okay, Psychic Teleportation trainees, here are the rules.

    1. lunch is 45 minutes at 12 sharp
    2. smoking is only allowed outside the building
    3. if you or your target is even suspected of being a fan of Jeff Goldblum, you are both terminated immediately, oh, and never, ever, for the love of God, allow a fly in the room while you're working
    --
    Anybody want a peanut?
  164. Philadelphia Experiment by mrseigen · · Score: 1

    Worked out real great for them last time. Why bother?

  165. I'd rather read about dismantling the military by the_REAL_sam · · Score: 1

    But lets consider it..

    Just think of all the creative benefit we could get from ending military/weapons R&D. People who'd spent their entire lives developing weapons could, instead, devote effort to improving human lives.

    You know, things like industrial tech that doesn't deplete national resources, or pollute. Silent cars. A legitimate replacement for internal combustion.

    But wait! If they developed this, we'd never need cars again!

    On the other hand, would any non-demonic supernatural spirit help the military out with magical stuff like that? Or are they going to use physicists to legitimize it?

    --
    "Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." -Jesus Christ The Lord's Prayer
  166. Rubbish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Although it is not really fair to taint someone with the type of people who find a hypothesis interesting, you might find this interview with the author ( http://www.stardrive.org/davis.shtml ) revealing, as is the whole site.

    This ( http://www.its.org/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=po sting&mode=quote&p=5173 ) short comment from Robert Park at the International Thermoelectric Society is also worth noting
    [snip]
    WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 29 Oct 04 Washington, DC

    1. WARPED SCIENCE: BEAM ME UP SCOTTY, THEY'RE CRAZY DOWN HERE.
    Making the rounds in Washington this week is a 75-page Air Force Research Laboratory report, Teleportation Physics Study (my spell checker balks on "teleportation," and well it should). This is not the IBM entangled photon stuff; this is transporting people across space. The subway does that, but it's not included in the report. Instead it describes "conveyance of persons by psychic means," and "transport through extra space dimensions or parallel universes." The contractor for the study was Warp Drive Metrics in Las Vegas, and the author was Eric W. Davis, PhD, FBIS. We couldn't find Dr. Davis in American Men and Women of Science, so we googled him and Warp Drive Metrics. Warp Drive Metrics has no website. We did find an article by Dr. Davis, Wormhole Induction Propulsion, prepared for the 1997 NASA Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Workshop, which NASA had refused to allow me to attend http://www.aps.org/WN/WN97/wn081597.cfm . His affiliation then was the National Institute for Discovery Science, Las Vegas. The NIDS website displays an Oct 15, 04 notice from its president that the Institute is on an "inactive status." Desperate for information, we contacted the Project Manager of the study, Dr. Franklin Mead, Senior Scientist of the Advanced Concepts Office. He's not listed in American Men and Women of Science either, but he has a 1996 Patent (5,590,031) for a system to convert zero point energy to electrical energy. Apparently it's not available yet. He could not give me the exact cost of the teleportation report, but said the subcontractor, ERC Inc., would know. We called ERC, but teleportation is just one small part of a huge contract. Two weeks ago we learned of the Air Force positron bomb (WN 15 Oct 04). How many fantasy weapons are taxpayers buying?
    [/snip]

    One further thing, Quantum Entanglement is not the instantaneous transmission of matter. It is the instantaneous transmission of state (spin) *information* - a very different animal with promising applications in data communications.

  167. There is more to this than you might think... by TheUglyAmerican · · Score: 1
    --
    "Written on the pages is the answer to the never ending story..."
  168. Sort of... by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    You make a big assumption. Reletivity applies only to objects with mass. If you try to set M = 0 in the equasions, the zero causes the math to blow up. That an object will have mass seem like a pretty fair assumption at this point in time. There is nothing to prevent you from traveling at infinite speed if you have no mass. Travel at infinite speed sounds to me like teleportation.

    More to the point though, this is a huge waste of time and money. Solve a few simpler problems first, like say, the grand unification theory. It would probably be a better first step.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  169. That explains Al Gore & the space-time continu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Truth IS stranger than meta-fiction!

  170. Oh... by fyngyrz · · Score: 1
    ...I get it...
    of course it probably hasn't entered into anyone's mind here that the whole thing is a 'hoax' project

    ...you mean like religion.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  171. Oh... by fyngyrz · · Score: 1
    ...I get it...
    It's not really the same- the Virgin Birth is a traditional doctrine, endorsed by conservatives, and has been around for longer than this nation has.

    ...you mean like astrology.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  172. OK, read the "wiki" link... by StressGuy · · Score: 1

    intriguing. while I don't have much background in quantum anything, I do have some background in chaos theory. So, I kinda get the idea.

    Still, my mind kept turning to the Star Wars plot device of mideoclorines (or whatever they are).

    I can't help but think it would be just a bit mind blowing to discover that George Lucas was kinda on the right track...

    --
    A goal is a dream with a deadline
    1. Re:OK, read the "wiki" link... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I can't help but think it would be just a bit mind blowing to discover that George Lucas was kinda on the right track...

      If you have such a problem with basic causal connections to not even consider that he, y'know, might've actually based his lame-ass idea on mitochondria itself...especially if the name isn't tipping you off...I'd say the only thing you're blowing around here is Lucas.

      Try reading some real fucking science for a change.

    2. Re:OK, read the "wiki" link... by StressGuy · · Score: 1

      Doesn't take much to piss you off does it?

      FYI - science fiction is loaded with instances where someone's raw imagination actually hit surprisingly close to home. Doesn't necessarily make them geniuses or visionaries, just law of averages really. OTOH - Jules Verne seemed to hit close to the mark more than his fair share of times.

      It would appear that you have read far too much into my obervation of a "basic causal connection" than you should have.
      .
      . ...try just doing some F##king reading for a change.

      --
      A goal is a dream with a deadline
  173. yeah right by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

    What kind of laser beam weapon could be so ridiculously preposterous that it would be harder to explain to Congress than the fact that we're wasting money on teleportation??

    1. Re:yeah right by Cyberdyne · · Score: 1
      What kind of laser beam weapon could be so ridiculously preposterous that it would be harder to explain to Congress than the fact that we're wasting money on teleportation??

      It's not a preposterous one you should be looking for, but a perfectly plausible and genuine one they want to keep secret. Think about stealth technology, back before that was public knowledge - certainly not preposterous, and certainly not listed as such in the budget at the time. If this is genuine spending, it's probably going into project they just don't want the public to know they're working on - something like the passive radar using cellphone or TV transmission echoes, laser communications as a substitute for radio in some situations, clever new body armor materials (all of those are genuine and publicly reported, of course, but presumably others are not).

  174. Not quite news...they've tried this before. by Svet-Am · · Score: 1

    Okay, so I can understand that Slashdot editors don't read past posts to ensure that they don't re-invent the wheel.

    But, apprarently, DoD doesn't either. Experiments into this kind of thing have been done before...and long ago to, though DoD strictly denies it.

    http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/montauk.html
    htt p://www.crystalinks.com/montauk.html
    http://www.e denseve.net/montauk_experiment_project .htm

    http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq21-1.htm
    ht tp://www.navalships.org/eldridge.html
    http://www. spiritual-endeavors.org/abilities/phila .htm

    --
    [move .sig! for great justice, take off every .sig!]
  175. Sure but by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

    that doesn't mean we should investigate every hair brained scheme to the tune of millions of dollars.

  176. On the other hand... by YuppieScum · · Score: 1
    If, say 30 years ago, you said you were going to fund research into
    quantum cryptography and computation, entanglement research, and thereotical string theory
    they'd have laughed you out of tenure and thrown away the key...
    --
    This sig left unintentionally blank.
    1. Re:On the other hand... by fyngyrz · · Score: 1
      thereotical string theory... they'd have laughed you out of tenure and thrown away the key...

      Man, I'm already laughing like heck. Show some mercy! :)

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  177. It's NOT a joke by khayman80 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I actually read the PDF and I have to say that I think they're dead serious.

    The first part of the article deals with all the legitimate ways to move particles from point A to point B without going through the intervening space. These methods (while very, VERY far off in the future) are scientifically plausible even if they sound like they were lifted from a bad Star Trek script. The second part, of course, is full of the worst kind of pseudo-science, like telekenisis and psychic abilities. But, really, the first half of the proposal is only a waste of money because the technology involved is too far off to be useful in any reasonably timeframe.

    For example, negative energy is a real phenomenon in quantum physics. It is most commonly discussed in the context of the Casimir effect. Here's an article that discusses the Casimir effect. Basically, the negative energy arises because empty space itself has a certain amount of vacuum energy, and the Casimir effect reduces these fluctuations inside two metal plates (which have to be spaced absurdly closely together and manufactured to extremely exact precision for the effect to be measureable). Because we generally say that empty space has zero energy and the space between the plates has less energy than that, the Casimir effect is regarded as a source of "negative energy". This could actually be useful (one day in the far FAR future) for opening up space-time wormholes. And, no, I'm not joking either.

    Also, while "warp drive" may be an overused Trek term, it's also a (semi) legitimate topic of discussion in physics. In 1994, Dr. Miguel Alcubierre found a solution to General Relativity that seemed to allow for faster than light travel while obeying special and general relativity. What followed was a lively debate on the plausibility of the "Alcubierre Warp Drive". One of the most recent objections argued that Alcubierre's warp drive would never be able to cross lightspeed but might allow for non-Newtonion sublight travel.

  178. Isn't that you? by Tau+Zero · · Score: 1
    Any scientist worth anything would at least look for some evidence for or against rather than dismissing out of hand like the lot of you.
    Really? Do you think that scientists go looking for evidence in favor of geocentrism every time somebody raises a claim that Earth is unique and thus central? How about phlogiston? Spontaneous generation? "The Great Flood"?

    There are a few points which scientists have to use to concentrate attention on those things that are actually worthwhile:

    1. Untestable claims are worthless; they cannot lead to further discoveries.
    2. Claims which have been tested and failed are complete wastes of time. (This is not the same as having been tested and found ambiguous, such as effects below the threshold of current systems of measurement, e.g. gravity waves.)
    3. Any and all evidence must be examined closely to be certain that it is not due to confounding effects or merely experimental error.
    Without that you wind up going nowhere.
    Science is supposed to be a tool for discovery, not a religion like some of you make it out to be.
    Science is a mechanism for uncovering new knowledge by generating hypotheses for test, testing them, and refining hypotheses based on the results. A hypothesis such as "psychic teleportation" which has no known physical mechanism and no existence proof (which would prove that there are unknown mechanisms at work) is of no further interest to science; these claims have been raised, examined, found wanting and dismissed.
    Are all studies that reach a dead end a waste of money or do they provide us with valuable insight?
    There is no point in repeating research which has reached negative conclusions just because some people wish that reality was not as it is. This goes double for leeches who just want to suck at the public teat.
    --
    Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
  179. Star Trek teleportation probabilistic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If one can instigate a mass into a quantum form and transmit via a virtual waveguide (containment field), then collapse the probabilistic waveform at a particular space-time volume. Maybe an embedded mathmatical function that after intitial value, interates to a known "collapsing" value.

    BTW One ST Book suggested that transporters had more to do with the Warp effect that drove the ship, than anything else.

  180. Hardly surprising. by miguel · · Score: 2, Funny

    With a country that is going back to the middle
    ages, this seems only like the tip of the
    iceberg.

    With Bush in office, I expect the next couple of
    years to be packed with amusement from your witch
    hunts to your basic alchemy courses taught in
    schools and maybe some sacrifices made to the
    gods if the stock market goes up.

    miguel.

  181. Check Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is simply amazing the stuff that came up.

    UFO reporting

    Warp Drive Technology

    Parapsychology

    Tons of crackpot stuff. The guy must be running five or six different research centers out of the same residential postal address. Yes, it is residential and no where near UNLV or a commercial area. I understand some of us are midnight engineers that work from our garages, but I find it suspect given the plethora of offcial sounding research center names residing at the Nevada address.

  182. Faith based sience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The faith-based presidency was such a success, why not expand the concept to a faith-based military that funds faith-based science?

    We're not letting ourselves be limited by those ivory tower intellectuals. Peer review? Pfft! They are no peers of ours. We create our own reality!

  183. Carlos Castaneda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They must've been reading some "Power of Silence" or my personal favorite "Tales of Power".

  184. USAF reading to much Frank Herbert?? by gnarled · · Score: 1

    This immediately made me think of how they did long distance space travel in the Dune series.

    The pilots of huge spacing guild ships bent space and time with their minds, effectively teleporting the ship across the galaxy. Although anyone on /. should already know that.

    --
    I'm a firm believer in the philosophy of a ruling class. Especially since I rule. -Randal, Clerks
  185. Yawn... the Australians have already done it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  186. The possibilities are limitless... by Eric+Damron · · Score: 1

    "Explaining why the lab sponsored the study, AFRL spokesman Ranney Adams said, "If we don't turn over stones, we don't know if we have missed something."

    Why limit spending the taxpayer's money on this alone? The possibilities are limitless if you're going to turn over every stone.

    May I suggest a study of the destructive power of orgazmic energy? Just get a whole bunch of guys to form a big circle and think evil thoughts while jerking off...

    --
    The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
  187. Re:The Shoulders of Giants by Skavookie · · Score: 1

    To all those who posted repeatedly to bash King for borrowing from others: get over it.

    One would think "geeks," of all people, would understand the principle of building on the work of others. Stephen King makes extensive use of this principle, as do others who are now generally thought of as great authors.

    Stephen King very openly makes references to older literature all over the place. My favorite is his Dark Tower series, which he says was inspired by a line of poetry from Shakespeare (As I recall, it was one of the random lines produced by Edgar in King Lear). This line in turn seems to have been borrowed from some still older source and as far as I know the actual origin is unknown.

    Much of what is now considered great classic literature is full of borrowings from and references to other classics. Tolkien borrows heavily from some very old norse literature such as the Volsunga Saga. Almost every line of Shakespeare's work contains a reference to something older. Romeo and Juliette itself, for example, is an obvious adaptation of the story of Pyramus and "Thisne" (hehe). Hamlet was inspired by a ghost who... oh.. wait.. that was a cheesy movie, not real life.

  188. Psychic teleportation already works! by Snaller · · Score: 1

    When Bush won he sent a thought to Europe and they thought "Right back at you!"

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  189. Pseudo-explanations. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "If telekinesis, ESP, etc. were biologically possible, it would have been evolved by some creatures already." ... "Yet, no animal (or plant) seems to have such powers. "

    It is unlikely that humanity is unique in have some never-before evolved power. The more scientists study animals, the more they find that humans are not qualitatively different from other creatures, only quantitatively different. Other creatures can count, create tools, have emotions, participate in social structures, practice deception, be aware of what others might think or do, etc. We exhibit these properties to a greater degree than do animals, but we are not unique."

    And yet no predator has developed the gun (except man). Just think of all the advantages of wolves with guns? Or birds with radar? How about whales with torpedoes? Or dogs with a built in pooper-scooper?

    Gee, I guess evolution can't solve everything. Seriously until you can answer what it means to be human? You're going to be handicapped as far as what we can and can't do.

  190. Remote Viewing wasn't just a CIA program by ravenspear · · Score: 1

    1.5 Million dollars for essentially a program that the CIA back in the 1970's decided was full of crap and decided to abandon.

    The DIA ran a remote viewing program until the mid-90s and it did have some successes.

    1. Re:Remote Viewing wasn't just a CIA program by jcr · · Score: 1

      The DIA ran a remote viewing program until the mid-90s and it did have some successes.

      Um, NO.

      The program may have had some coincidences that looked like success in "remote viewing" to the slower kids in the agency. ESP, "Remote viewing", whatever you want to call it, is hogwash.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  191. The goal of every academic is to be on the leading edge of a new wave of discovery. Where are you getting your stereotypes from?

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
    1. Re:Eh? by geg81 · · Score: 1

      The goal of every academic is to be on the leading edge of a new wave of discovery.

      Academics are just far out enough to appear innovative yet still get published. That usually isn't very far out.

      For example, most of physics is happening around the fringes of two theories we already can't both be right at the same time (quantum mechanics, general relativity), and the few brave souls that try to look at alternatives are generally considered a little cooky, if not worse. On the other hand, work trying to fit new phenomena into existing frameworks with the most contorted arguments is hailed as high quality work.

      Academics are crowd pleasers and herd animals. If they are trying to be on the leading edge of anything, it's more like the leading edge of a stampede of bulls.

    2. Re:Eh? by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1

      Are you a failed academic? You sound like one. Or maybe an engineer, resentful that you didn't understand physics. Are you able to make a genuine judgement of what is or isn't a 'contorted argument'? The people who peer review papers are a smart bunch. Are you telling me you could do a better job?

      --
      Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  192. Re: For the love of... by dourk · · Score: 1

    Actually, the report was only $25,000. They paid it to a guy with a company named "Warp Drive Metrics" in Vegas.

    His report recommended the $7.5m. Not the USAF.

    What did the AFRL say? "There are no plans by the AFRL Propulsion Directorate for additional funding on this contract."

    All they spent was $25k. My truck cost more than that. Its a bargain if they actually find a 'recommendation' worth following up. Just one of the costs of having the most technologically advanced military in the known universe.

    --
    Wake up.
  193. Expected fun... by Anne+Honime · · Score: 1

    Every time a strange idea makes its way toward the light, "real" scientists jump on their feet to reject those ideas as un-scientifical. Much in the same way catholic priests frowned at Copernicus, laughed at Kepler, & jailed Galilei. Because rotation of earth around the sun "just didn't fit" the well admited theory. Then came Newton ; and modern science was born, a very religion on its own, spreading its dogma on the world. Trouble is : nobody yet knows what "gravitation" is. Sure, anybody can now calculate its effect, but as to why it exists in the first place... the very nature of it remains to be discovered. So why not leave a room to dreams ? Hey, they can even turn into something useful someday. And reread the last book of Kepler, the celestial messenger [certainly a poor translation of the title]. Before Newton, in that book, Kepler forsaw a travel from earth to the moon, and said that bodies would appear weightless in the ether. Pretty accurate, no ?

  194. Recommend: The Conscious Universe, Dean Radin by xtal · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I am an EE as well, and I don't consider any falsifiable hypothesis "quackery", just very improbable until tested by an experiment. I find it very amusing that more scientists have a very closed mind .. isn't the whole idea to question everything?

    Anyway, the above book covers a lot of studies headed up real scientists, and there is a lot of interesting data out there; the effects they find are not huge, but they are statistically signifigant and worthy of investigation.

    If someone has an odd idea, fine - ask them for a repeatable experiment anyone can do to replicate said hypothesis. That's what science is about, and that's why we don't automatically assume the world is flat and we are the center of the universe anymore.

    --
    ..don't panic
  195. No, no, no... rethink this. You need to be fair. by fyngyrz · · Score: 4, Funny
    Those guys made an awful decision, and should be teleported out of their jobs.

    As a successful businessman who has handled many ticklish employee issues, let me explain how you should actually deal with this.

    First, you fire them using the normal politically correct "here are your final paychecks, and the Human Resources department's collective foot in your collective asses" procedure.

    But you inform them that if they can teleport back in, they can have their jobs back.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  196. Psychic Teleportation by SEWilco · · Score: 1

    As far as I'm concerned, the more psychics that are teleported the better. Or whatever the Air Force wants to call it, as long as they vanish.

  197. plagiarism by httpoet · · Score: 1

    Would it be too much to ask that the story poster NOT blatently plagiarise his article summary directly from the article itself? It would be different if he said "from the USA Today article: '...'". Instead he takes the first three paragraphs and pathetically attempts to pass it off as his own writing.


    This happens a lot on slashdot. Am I the only one that gets angry about either the total ignorance or total disrespect on the part of the poster?

  198. If it's posted on Yahoo!. . . by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 1
    then the chances are you're seeing a piece of social engineering and not news.

    Think about it; the studies into this kind of thing which are serious are probably not going to make it into general water-cooler circulation. Hire a kook, let the media play it out, let the Slashdotters carve him up so that they can sit back reassured once again that the material reality sold to them in high school is sound and safe and without rival when nothing could be further from the truth.

    This is done all the time. Auto manufacturers call it, "After Market Advertising", and it's designed to reassure Americans that they made the right choice when they bought their car, and by extension, bought into the lunatic sham of the credit-based manufacturing economy which keeps them enslaved. (How many car owners are locked into stupid jobs they need to drive to in order to keep up debt payments? How many of them could drop everything and decide to explore the unique passions each of us was born to explore? This is a powerful and effective form of social control.)

    And for goodness sake. . ! --Teleportation?

    Could they be any more camp? I think military science has probably moved beyond Halloween ideas at this point. There are much, much bigger fish to fry.


    -FL

  199. Maybe they can teleport a $1200 hammer? by micksterama · · Score: 1

    I mean if you're going to waste money, why not do it really big!

  200. tabletop black holes! by capn_nemo · · Score: 1
    From the report, section 2.3, paragraph two (bold is mine):

    "However, new ultrahighintensity lasers became available in the 1990s that have achieved extreme physical conditions in the lab that are comparable to the extreme astrophysical conditions expected to be found in stellar cores and on black hole event horizons (Perry, 1996; Mourou et al., 1998; Perry, 2000). The power intensity of these lasers has reached the point to where they actually probe QED vacuum physics and general relativistic physics, and they have even modified the vacuum itself. The lasers were originally called petaWatt lasers (operating range of 10^14 - 10^18 Watts/cm2 at femtosecond pulses), but they have now reached power intensity levels in the 10^25 - 10^30 Watts/cm2 range. The lasers were made possible by a novel breakthrough called chirped pulse amplification whereby the initial low energy/low power intensity laser beam is stretched, amplified and then compressed without experiencing any beam distortions or amplifier damage. This laser system was initially designed as a large-optics beam-line power booster for the NOVA laser fusion experiment at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. But researchers found a way to shrink the optics down to tabletop scale, and one can now own and operate a tabletop ultrahighintensity laser for $500,000."

    Tabletop-sized optics that produce the sun's core temperature!! I want one. Make that two. First of course, I'll produce a quantum singularity to power my warp drive. Then, I'll use the other one to power my transporter! Are there any used spaceships on ebay right now?

  201. Teleportation my shiny metal rear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Teleportation my shiny metal rear.

    What we really need is a physics theory of parallel universes, for the purpose of transporting beer, pop and pizza from their hapless inhabitants. We really do need more experimental data.. I mean the 6-pack and the medium Papa John's was not even close to enough this friday night. And that's even without mentioning the kinds of "resources", like crack cocain, necessary for weekly discovering the physical mechanisms that lay behind the psychotronic manipulation of matter.

  202. yes this looks like a waste but... by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

    I remember a bunch of experts that looked into gas turbine engines in the early 1930s for use as aircraft propulsion. The worked out that a 500 HP gas turbine would weigh 10,000 lbs and burn 30 times the fuel of a piston engine of the same power. A brilliant nut named Frank Whittle did not believe it and went on to build the first practical jet aka Gas turbine engine. While this seems nutty. Trying something that is off beat and wacked out every now and again is a good thing.
    Just make sure that it is not too wacked out/

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  203. Outer Limits Episode by rubberbando · · Score: 1

    I remember an Outer Limits episode (newer series) where aliens (strangely looked like Raptors) gave humanity the ability to teleport between their world and ours. The engineer at the space station running the teleporter ran into quite a dilema when the machine malfunctioned, revealing to him that the source data was destroyed (killed) when the copy materialized in the other place. It further complicated things when he was ordered to murder the girl (whom he fell in love with) to balance things out.

    --
    DEAD DEAD DEAD DELETE ME
  204. Yes they have. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Phychic powers have been studied for centuries. No one has made any convincing argument or presented any substantial evidence in this area.

    I suggest you read the evidence first, and then comment. You can start here.

    Allow me to quote from the first article there:

    "Using the standards applied to any other area of science, it is concluded that psychic functioning has been well established. The statistical results of the studies examined are far beyond what is expected by chance. Arguments that these results could be due to methodological flaws in the experiments are soundly refuted."

    And:

    "It is recommended that future experiments focus on understanding how this phenomenon works, and on how to make it as useful as possible. There is little benefit to continuing experiments designed to offer proof, since there is little more to be offered to anyone who does not accept the current collection of data."

    1. Re:Yes they have. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The above was posted anonymously for the obvious reason that there are too many people who won't take it seriously without even bothering to read the article. Science is not a popularity contest, truth is self-evident. Read the applicable studies first, form opinions second. Anything else is not science.

    2. Re:Yes they have. by Tony-A · · Score: 1

      "Using the standards applied to any other area of science, it is concluded that psychic functioning has been well established. The statistical results of the studies examined are far beyond what is expected by chance. Arguments that these results could be due to methodological flaws in the experiments are soundly refuted."

      With a prelude like that, it's guaranteed bunkum.
      Stastical results devised after the data is in can be guaranteed to show stastical properties that are outside the limits of chance.
      Measuring methodological flaws from within the box presumes a bit too much, methinks.

      Houdini wanted very much to find some real mediums, but all he could find were fakes.

      If I can teleport something up, seems I can make a functioning perpetual motion machine. If I can teleport something down, where does the energy go?

      Maybe this piece of spam is legit? Not likely.

    3. Re:Yes they have. by RichardX · · Score: 1

      Intresting point. I am not a physicist, but while I have many objections against psychic teleportation (mainly on the psychic part, actually), this isn't one of them.. correct me if I'm wrong here, but in your example of teleporting something up to create a perpetual motion machine, that only works assuming it takes less energy to teleport the object than it would to lift it otherwise. As a totally unfounded guess I would expect a teleporter to require a hell of a lot of energy.. just.. well.. because it seems like it should, really.

      The one about teleporting something down is pretty interesting though :)

      --
      Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
    4. Re:Yes they have. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With a prelude like that, it's guaranteed bunkum.

      Way to not read it first. That was the entire point, that no one bothers to read anything that says, "The evidence is good" because it disagrees with their preconceived notions. That's not how science works!

      Stastical results devised after the data is in can be guaranteed to show stastical properties that are outside the limits of chance.

      I suppose you've never heard of a composite study. The above author analyzed each study used to check for statistical validity of the methods used, and then used valid statistical techniques to combine the studies to determine the likelihood that all of the studies examined were incorrect or selectively reported.

    5. Re:Yes they have. by Tony-A · · Score: 1

      that no one bothers to read anything that says, "The evidence is good" because it disagrees with their preconceived notions.

      Nope. If the evidence is good, it can stand on its own.
      If it needs to be propped up by someone saying "The evidence is good", then no one bothers with it, preconceived notions or otherwise.

      If I'm dealt thirteen spades, I know somebody has stacked the deck. I know a few too many pranksters for it to be chance.

      I've heard of composite studies and I've also heard of horses that can do arithmetic. With covert channels of communication you can do some amazing things.

      Interesting phrasing "the likelihood that all of the studies examined were incorrect or selectively reported". [Emphasis added]
      I'd be more interested in the likelihood that all of the studies examined were correct and that none of them were selectively reported (or selectively selected).

    6. Re:Yes they have. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the evidence is good, it can stand on its own.

      The evidence is good and it does stand on its own. That doesn't mean you automatically know about it unless you take the time to read it for yourself. What you're really saying is, "If the evidence were good, I would already know it." And that is a fallacy.

      Interesting phrasing "the likelihood that all of the studies examined were incorrect or selectively reported". [Emphasis added]
      I'd be more interested in the likelihood that all of the studies examined were correct and that none of them were selectively reported (or selectively selected).


      Once again, if you had bothered to read the articles, you would see that this is addressed and found to be overwhelmingly unlikely. There is even a calculation made of the precise number of studies which would have to have gone unreported for this to be the case. (And this number is so overwhelmingly large as to be impossible.)

  205. What next? by jcr · · Score: 1

    Is the Army going to pay the scientologits to study SooPeR SeKRit Operating-Tetan PowerZZ?

    As a taxpayer, I find this simply outrageous. Anyone in the chain of command that authorized paying for this tripe needs to be taken off the public payroll, right this bloody minute.

    Does the USAF have a procedure to dishonorably discharge an officer for being a blithering idiot?

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  206. Parent links to an relevant article; MOD UP! by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 1

    The article link is here.

  207. Just for the record... by NatHoward · · Score: 1
    Since the report gets into PK and psychic phenomema and even claims that some of the stuff done in that area was "repeatable" (at the bottom of page 57, for example), it's worth mentioning that there is an attempt to see if such things are "real".

    The James Randi Educational Foundation has been offering a $1 Million prize for some time now to anyone who can repeat such phenomena under agreed-upon viewing conditions.

    There's one-eighth of the budget right there -- if you can deliver the "desktop demo".

  208. But... by Xerxes2695 · · Score: 1

    I already knew they were going to do that......

  209. Spoon bending by SiliconAddict · · Score: 1

    Psychokinesis, or psychic teleportation. In support of the idea, the report cites UFO reports, Soviet and Chinese studies of psychics and U.S. military studies of spoon-bending phenomena.
    How non-7337, these guys haven't even figured out that there is no spoon...

  210. Totally wrong by tehanu · · Score: 2, Informative

    That's totally wrong. For quantum teleportation to work you STILL need to be able to pass information from A to B say via a wire or other classical information route. What teleportation does that say a fax does not is it is supposed to make a *perfect* (well theoretically anyway) copy of the information. What is teleported is NOT the photon or the atom but information on the quantum state of the atom or photon which is reproduced in an atom or photon at the other end. I've heard quantum teleportation described as a "perfect fax machine". Regardless, the atom/photon does NOT suddenly disappear from A and appear at B.

    1. Re:Totally wrong by khayman80 · · Score: 1
      Nope. The quantum state of the particle *is* the particle. There's no difference between one electron and another electron except for its quantum state (look up the chapter on "indistinguishable particles" in any quantum mechanics textbook.

      The reason that this is true is that quantum states of particles are very different than classical descriptions of particles (ie "the baseball is travelling at 5 m/s due north at 1 radian above the horizontal at 5 degrees north and 3 degrees south at sealevel, etc, etc). You can't, for instance, take the information about a particle and make TWO copies. This is forbidden by the "no cloning theorem", a fundamental result of quantum information theory. These two points are the reason that every quantum information theoretician or experimentalist that I know regards quantum teleportation as "actually moving the particle from point A to point B without going through the intervening space".

      Granted, we haven't perfected this process yet. For instance, most experiments have only teleported a photon's polarization wave function. The spatial wave function has been in a very trivial state that is replicated very easily. This is going to change, though. There is no fundamental physical law that prevents teleporting the *entire* quantum wave function- it just requires more classical information to be sent.

      To recap... in every experimentally distinguishable sense, the particle disappears from point A and reappears at point B. It does not have to move through the intervening space. What *does* have to be transmitted through that space is classical information. That classical information doesn't have to be sent immediately, though, and it can take a very innocuous form. For instance, in order to teleport the polarization state of a photon all I need to do is call my friend at the other end and give him two bits of information (ie "Hey, Bob, the results are '1,0'. Enjoy the photon.")

  211. Re:Spider Sense (and roaches and flies, oh my) by sonicattack · · Score: 3, Funny


    Flies have a 3-stage pipelined visual system that operates a 400 Hz (compared to human's 60 Hz system). They see the swatter and react more quickly than the human eye.


    Why do Americans always assume the rest of the world goes by their standards?

    The human visual system, as we Europeans all know very well, runs on 50 Hz here. But this is more than well compensated for by our higher count of rods and staffs.

  212. Godwin's "Law" sux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The really bad part about Lysenkoism was the guy's ability to send representatives of competing scientific ideas to GULAG -- through the universal accusations of treason.

    As long as that ability is nowhere to be seen around here (and it is not), bringing up the scumbag's name is no better than mentioning Nazis :-)


    Please stop trying to limit discussion.

    More and more, certain people use Godwin's "Law" as a bludgeon to keep other people from using a verbal/written shorthand to point out parallels with that which is oppressing them, and to discount their statements and ideas. Now they are trying to expand it to include any mention of any oppressive system, not just Nazis. Taking anologies away from people is just another way of verbally hamstringing them. And that, like personal attacks and verbal abuse, is not a valid form of argument.

    1. Re:Godwin's "Law" sux by mi · · Score: 1
      Taking anologies away from people is just another way of verbally hamstringing them.

      The whole point of my response was that the analogy was false. Thus taking it away was a good thing.

      --
      In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  213. Re:Spider Sense (and roaches and flies, oh my) by YoJ · · Score: 1
    The thing about senses of insects being wired directly to their muscles is how you kill them by hand, using intelligence. To kill flies, creep up slowly near them after they land. Clap hands quickly about 6 inches above the stationary fly. Flies instinctively and involuntarily jump backwards and up and start flying when startled. Right into your crushing hands!

    It's funny, when you see someone do this is sticks with you, and you pass it on to other people by doing it when they are watching. It reminds me of the experiments with tool use in apes. Only we humans have the internet...

  214. Hmm by pyth · · Score: 1
    This paper reads as a summary of recent hypothetical teleportation techniques from the scientific literature (and otherwise). The section on psychic teleportation isn't really a big part of the paper. And that part is basically a summary of a whole lot of PK experiments. I'm unfamiliar with this field so a lot of the things mentioned were new to me.

    A quote from that part of the paper: "The skeptical reader should not be so quick to dismiss the subject matter in this chapter, because one must remain open-minded about this subject and consider p-Teleportation as worthy of further scientific exploration. The psychotronics topic is controversial within the western scientific community. The debate among scientists and scientific philosophers is highly charged at times, and becomes acrimonious to the point where reputable skeptical scientists cease being impartial by refusing to examine the experimental data or theories, and they prefer to bypass rational discourse by engaging in ad hominem attacks and irrational "armchair" arguments."

    The problem with all this psi stuff is that even if it's real, the evidence is extremely scare given its importance. I mean, I've never seen it demonstrated, even on video. Why is it so unpublicized?

  215. Psychic teleportation??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Imagine a Beowulf cluster..."

    *POOF*

    "Sweet!"

  216. Let's join hands and tell ourselves it's not real by Zareste · · Score: 1

    Then we won't have to worry about it!

    Y'know, critics of wasteful military spending can go find a million things money is wasted on, but research? Obviously there are a lot of kids out there wanting to believe "I saw teleporting in a video game, so moving instantly from one place to another r impossible!" and most ironically, they're using computers to say this.

    This is the first worthwhile military study I've heard of in years, what with all the usual variations of atomic bomb design, and honestly, where would they be if they listened to every clueless nut job who couldn't comprehend the number of sides on a triangle? There are quite a few countries out there who, unlike the dumb hicks we're surrounded by here, aren't told that nothing exists outside their local mall and supermarket. If we just concentrated on blowing more things up from helicopters, what do we get? More useless deaths by soldiers with no clue what their cameras are looking at, while someone in a more intelligent foreign military or even a group of thugs could go straight to our leaders and take them out.

    But I guess, over here, we're just supposed to think everything under the sun is a big fake conspiracy lie unless some company has been advertising and selling it for many years. It's not a written law or anything; just something upheld by a few raving lunatics. But, should we really tend to a bunch of idiots who want to claim 'instant movement is impossible because I can't comprehend physics!' I really don't know. Thing is, those idiots are technically paying for it, but then the military is there for security. I mean if we were to wrap military standards around the 'nothing exists!!' ideas of a few... not-so-intelligent people, then what about the rest? The people who aren't a bunch of uneducated sheep would be in danger because of the thought-free ideas of just a few.

    --
    I am NOT a number! I am a - oh wait, I'm number 761710. Look! 761710!
  217. Those idiots will never learn! by swaic · · Score: 1


    That's impossible! This big hunk of crap is going to sail through the air like a bird. Fools!!!

    My point is that not because we cannot conceive of something with our current mental capacity means it's impossible. Why not give it a try? The only discussion should be the amount of money being spent. Besides, there are plenty of other areas where money is being squandered and could be saved.

    1. Re:Those idiots will never learn! by swaic · · Score: 1

      In case some people don't understand my rambling, I was talking about the Wright Brothers -- you know, the ones who made the aeroplane.

  218. Re:No, no, no... rethink this. You need to be fair by tickleboy2 · · Score: 1

    Riiiiiiiiiiiight... If I had the ability to teleport myself, my old job that fired me would be the last place I would want to teleport to. Unless of course it was to plant some illegal substances in their office with an anonymous tip to the police. :)

    --
    The only thing that will stop you from fulfilling your dreams is you. - Tom Bradley
  219. Strong vs Weak Dollar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Strong dollar also makes it cheap to purchase overseas assets. This seldom gets mentioned.

    When dollar is strong, buy overseas assets, reinvest all overseas non-dollar income into expansion. When dollar is weak, repatriate profits into dollars at a favorable exchange rate.

    Rinse and repeat until the people on the other side wisen up enough to peg their currency into the dollar. Then it's a different game what I don't know how to play.

    Argentine collapsed because of the peg, but on the other hand Malaysia doesn't seem to have any problems with the ringgit pegged to the dollar, even with their leftist policies and all.

  220. Actually, it's a rational thing to study by Morosoph · · Score: 1
    Not because it's likely to be right, but because:

    1. The observer would be an intrinsic part of any existant psychic phenomena, and one cannot trust establishment scientists to be neutral, or "rigourous, but in favour", as might be required.
    2. Belief in psychic phenomena is persistent, and although there is a high probability that this is simply because such ideas are appealing, there is also a chance that there is some real phenomenon, perhaps as weak as synchronicity*, underlying it. That one is engaged in fighting a war against all apparent superstition is a motive for irrational bias.
    3. The funding required is only a small fraction of the total funding available, so this is no threat to science, only (possibly) to the objectors' world-views.

    If there is a systematic distortion within the very structure of science, how can we expect scientists to be trusted to address it? Certainly, I think that we need to hold to the scientific method, but funding decisions are most certainly biased by pre-existing prejudice. Such funding is absolutely fine for the bulk of "normal science", but to insist that non-scientific bodies apply the same criteria is what Paul Feyerabend would call "scientific imperialism". Apologies for the link to Marxists.org; I could not find a better reference.



    *Possible mechanism for synchonicity: similarity of structure in complex waveforms could be a low-energy, high-entropy state (although a particular structure would be low-entropy), much as photons seek to be in a similar state when trapped in a small cavity (which is how the LASER works).

    1. Re:Actually, it's a rational thing to study by junkgrep · · Score: 1

      Apologies for the link to timecube, but you appare to have been educated stupid.

    2. Re:Actually, it's a rational thing to study by Morosoph · · Score: 1
      The site I linked simply published extracts from Paul's book. Paul Feyerabend is one of the big three "philosophers of science" along with Popper and Khun.

      If the hosting site, rather than the content is your criterion for reliability, here's a Wikipedia link. The link that I originally gave is the top one to come up in a Google search.

      It is notable that Feyerabend is not a Marxist; if anything Khun's philosophy is most congenial to Marxism, if you're looking to judge his philosophy politically.

  221. Watch more Star Trek, Mr. Krauss. by gd23ka · · Score: 1

    "It is in large part crackpot physics," says physicist Lawrence Krauss of Case Western Reserve University, author of The Physics of Star Trek, a book detailing the physical limits that prevent teleportation. He describes the Air Force report as "some things adapted from reasonable theoretical studies, and other things from nonsensical ones."

    "It is in large part crackpot heresy", says Geronimo Boccia, advisor to the Pope, author of "The Joys of Belief", a book detailing the divine limits set for mankind. He describes the heretic heliocentric teachings of Galileo Galilei that as "some things adapted from scripture and other things are clearly inspired by the devil".

    Nothing personal about Mr. Krauss here but we need more people to work on developing all the cool star treky stuff such as teleportation, the warp drive, the phasers, the universal translator, subspace communications, force fields, synterol, a society without money, holographic doctors. What we need less of is unimaginative people that will flip open a dusty five-year old textbook and tell us it can't be done becasuse of physics theories back in the days of the book was written.

  222. You miss the point... by Chriscypher · · Score: 1

    I think you miss the point here.

    Funding for applied psychic phenomona is consistent with the administration's Faith Based Initiative.

    Personally, I am glad that the Faith Based Inititive is now being applied to hard, physical sciences instead of just the fruity social sciences. Imagine the progress we can make now that we are not confined by the moldy paradigms, theories and "laws" of scientists. It's high time for spirtualists to take a turn!

    The problem with you liberal intelligentia elite is that you think that just because something is not scientific (testable, reproducible) that it is inherantly without merit. Can your science prove a negative? I thought not!

    Get with the program, bub.
    Faith == reality is the new science.
    Now click your heels together 3 times and pray this has all been a bad dream.

    .

    --
    "You have liberated me from thought."
  223. Re:What about the Christian Right? by curtoid · · Score: 1

    Teleportation sounds very un-Christian to me.

    No - actually Philip was transported in Acts 8:39-40, so this concept is not un-Christian.
    However, I suppose trying to duplicate the process with man-made tools might be considered "witchcraft."
    (quotes intended to differentiate witchcraft from "witchcraft." I hope that helps).

  224. Re:Spider Sense (and roaches and flies, oh my) by NardofDoom · · Score: 1
    It would be funny, but it's rods and cones.

    Please try witty post again.

    --
    You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
  225. Re:Spider Sense (and roaches and flies, oh my) by sonicattack · · Score: 1

    It would be funny, but it's rods and cones.

    This is exactly my point! You take for granted that American standards applies everywhere else!

    Once you've dissected an European eye and compared our 50 Hz color-correcting 64 bit staffs to your inferior 60 Hz cones, you'll want a pair yourself!

    :)

  226. Proved!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Give me a couple millions dollar and I can prove that it doesn't work.

  227. This is called risk analysis. by Chembryl · · Score: 1
    ... and this is ONLY $1 million a year, out of how many 100s of billions that is the US's defence budget?

    It sounds more than reasonable to me to spend that sort of money on an initial analysis of whether the claims are bullshit or not. Now just imagine if your country was at war and you were "second to market" in some 'way out' technology? Hiroshima for instance.

    For the record, yes IAAP (I Am A Physicist).

    --
    - This and all my posts are public domain. I am a Physicist. I am not your Physicist. This is not Physically advice
  228. In other news... by lahi · · Score: 1

    In other news:
    Greenland: Denmark has officially protested against a recently revealed operation by US Air Force at a secret base north of Thule. "We are appalled at the abuse suffered by the reindeer", said Danish environmental minister Connie Hedegaard. The USAF spokesperson George W. Santa declined to comment on questions about the nature of the research. It is suspected however, that the Air Force is investigating the use of reindeer power for strategic bombing.

    Egypt: The United States Salvation Army has begun excavations in the desert. Colonel George W. Lucas, who is overseeing the progress states: "If we are lucky, we may be able to march the ark of the covenant around Falluja some time next year." The colonel is well known for is role in the upstart of the US Force Force, which is supposed to result in a lightsaber-equipped strike force before the end of this millenium.

    Texas: A commission under the U.S. secretary of health is investigating a large number of teenage pregnancies. Mr. George W. Irgin gave this statement to the press: "As we all know, Texas teenagers know nothing about sex and are pledging abstinence, so the only scientific explanation is parthenogenesis. Our numerology experts are suggesting that the offspring of virgins by the name of Mary may be of interest to the US Navy and US Marine Corps, as their well-known waterwalking skills are perfect for amphibic operations."

    -Lasse

  229. Re:No, no, no... rethink this. You need to be fair by Zangief · · Score: 1

    You sir, are wiser than me.

  230. The market isn't truly free, but is mostly free... by LinuxParanoid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I totally agree with you that the market isn't truly free.

    A company or industry that's doing well can try to extract concessions from politicians (DMCA, antitrust wrist-slaps, telcom regulation, etc) and a company that's not doing well can generate political pressure to save jobs. And the former annoys me greatly, as I can tell it annoys you.

    But I find it hard to dismiss the sense that there is a "mostly free" market out there, having watched closely billion-dollar companies fall (SGI), and from a distance seen others just get lost (Kodak) or shift their core activity to avoid a lingering death (IBM). The market may not be truly free, but it is a harsh mistress.

    I can't find a full list of companies kicked off the Dow Jones (just 1999, 2004, 1895), but big companies even with their vast political influence cannot succeed when the market says "no thanks" to paying the hoped-for-nicely-profitable amount for their products.

    --LP

  231. Re: For the love of... by tabrnaker · · Score: 1

    haha, known universe. We don't even know our own oceans, let alone our solar system!

  232. Bullets and Energy by krysith · · Score: 1

    Actually, for something like bullets, you could want something which spreads the force, rather than something which absorbs the energy. This is only true if you don't mind the bullet reflecting/ricocheting, which can be a problem under some circumstances... ;)

    The reason why you want an energy absorber with a bike helmet or a car is that it is presumed that the object you will be making a collision with will likely be more massive than yourself (such as a tree or the road). In such a case, the object which will be reflecting is you, and human bodies don't change velocity suddenly very well. However, with a bullet the object has a much smaller mass, so if the force is spread over a large area, it is very possible to reflect the bullet with minimal effect on the body. If you don't think this is true, then how is the bullet accelerated in the first place? Reflecting a bullet only requires twice the impulse of accelerating it, and many people's shoulders can handle the kick of a rifle. Of course, a rifle has additional mass to help with the kick, but spreading the impact over a larger area than the shoulder can help compensate for this. If a material were to become entirely rigid AND had enough strength to resist penetration AND the body behind it retains its shape (i.e. the rigid material ought to entirely surround the body), then the majority of the energy will be reflected back into the bullet. Of course, absorbing the energy works too, but is not the only way. Either way, you do not want the energy to be absorbed by your body when it hits you.

    This is why I have had myself encased entirely in steel. Except, of course, for my fingers which I use for typing on Slashdot. Alas, my only weakness ;).

    1. Re:Bullets and Energy by dbIII · · Score: 1
      Actually, for something like bullets, you could want something which spreads the force
      True, force on a larger area is lower pressure - but energy absorbed is directly related to the amount of pressure and the amount the material deforms. Materials that do not deform much under high pressure do not absorb much energy, and will transmit most of it. At the end of this long post I'll tell you how the force can be spread.

      Reflections of the pressure wave happen at interfaces, you will get one from the surface the bullet hits back into the bullet (small), and then another from the back of the first material after it has passed through. The intensity of the reflected wave is related to the difference of densities, so if there is nothing but air behind the material the reflection will be large - but even in that case the primary compression wave keeps on going. Lots of layers of very different densities will give a lot of surfaces to reflect off (hence kevlar flak jackets with lots of layers and air gaps), but having something to just bounce bullets off with no transfer of energy is not going to happen.

      If you had a body suit made of diamond, the very stiff material would absorb very little energy before the pressure wave would hit the back surface, and the thin suit would not allow the pressure wave to spread far. While some of the pressure wave would reflect, the transmitted wave would be very large, and probably would have the same effect as if you were not wearing the suit.

      A way to spread the wave is to have a honeycomb sort of material, so that when the wave tries to go forward it hits air, then has to go at an angle. This method is used to take a point source explosion and turn it into a wave front. In the flak jackets, since they are full of fibre they are mostly air, so a bit of compression has to happen before force gets transmitted to the next fibre.

      Steel transmits energy very well, which is why tanks are no longer just made out of a single thick steel plates.