Slashdot Mirror
Virtual Worlds and ESP
"Instead of thinking about telepathy from a present perspective, as in 'we have/use it now,' consider it from an evolutionary standpoint.Prehistoric humans with even a little telepathy would have enormous survival advantage. You'd be able to tell whether a predator was hiding behind the next rock, or whether it's an animal you're hunting for food. Or nothing, in which case you go off and hunt somewhere else.
In that case, natural selection would at the same time pressure animals, both predators and prey, to evolve to a form where they could block the effect so that their adversary (human or other) would have no idea where they were hiding.
Even if we can't tell where animals are hiding, even a little telepathy between humans could be used in group hunting and teaching offspring, or summoning help in a dire emergency. Even a brief feeling which influences your actions based on information from another human would confer enormous advantage.
Some people have reported that they have gotten 'feelings' that some loved one is in trouble, but frankly there is an overwhemingly enormous number of dire incidents throughout human history, each one of which would select for having the telepathic trait. Something as simple as children having the ability to alert their parents that they are in trouble would still confer enormous survival advantage.
From an evolutionary perspective, telepathy is a strong survival trait. Since we don't see it in the gene pool, it's unlikely that it's even possible."
Sesticulus raises a similar idea in a more compact form (it could be called the haven't been slapped" argument): "Invariably if I'm in a public place, there will be someone I find attractive and I will think "hey now". I've never had someone come up and slap me for thinking rude thoughts, so at the very least, women I find attractive, as a rule, do not have telepathy."
Reader seanellis writes with his prediction of the experiment's outcome:
"This experiment is very poorly controlled (who's to say that two people aren't also on the phone to one another, for example?), and some startlingly accurate correlations will occur. These will be debunked as the players come under scrutiny and the communication channels between players are detected.However, after these have been removed, some correlations between players will still remain, below the level of statistical significance. Rather than being dismissed as insignificant, the woo-woo crowd will seize on these random correlations as 'proof of need of more research.'
This prediction is not the result of clairvoyance, rather it is an educated guess based on previous observations of this kind of setup."
Even more dubious, dpbsmith writes not to "discount the possibility of outright fraud," asking: "Are they planning to strip-search the participants for hidden transmitters and receivers? To test and debug the system, have they hired a couple of good magicians skilled at 'mentalist' acts, with a promise to pay them well for their time if they can successfully cheat? Or, like most scientists, are they just protecting against unconscious cheating by honest, good-faith participants?"
Further, dpbsmith is disappointed that the article "doesn't really discuss the possibility of conscious, clever cheating... or implies that it's impossible because, well, gee, the system is so high-tech. ... People have smuggled transmitters and receivers into casinos, where the management is probably far more savvy, cynical, and experienced at detecting cheating — and financially motivated to do so — than these scientists."
Reader mdkemp took issue with the implication in some readers' comments that this research was disreputable, pointing out that such research is also undertaken "at respected institutions," writing: "Research into this stuff isn't just for [k]ooks and crazies -- even Princeton has a small lab the goal of which is to experimentally gather a 'better understanding of the role of consciousness in the establishment of physical reality.' It's called the 'Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research' (PEAR) lab, and its web page can be found at princeton.edu/~pear."
This met with an acerbic response from reader aepervius, who calls PEAR "a laughing stock" with "bad hypotheses, bias, bad statistical analysis, etc." He points out critical reports critical of PEAR at skepdic and at the Skeptic Report.
Reader RexRhino expressed a common sentiment:
"Can someone tell me why this isn't as outrageous as spending tax money to research 'intelligent design'? I mean, there is no real scientific theory that describes how telepathy would work, and virtually all scientific evidence says that telepathy doesn't exist. Telepathy is pretty much to fortune telling what Intelligent Design is to creationism — turning superstition into pseudo-science to make it palatable to the modern audience. I realize that England doesn't have the same strict legal seperation between religion and state as other countries, but even if research into the mystical and supernatural isn't strictly illegal it is certainly a questionable use of taxpayer money, no? Why are people outraged over Intelligent Design but not this kind of stuff?"
Reader Pyromage provided one answer to that question, writing: "Because it's possible to devise an experiment that could provide scientific evidence in its favor. ... Such an experiment does not — even in theory — exist for [Intelligent Design]."
Other responses to the story show that at least many Slashdot readers are none too happy with research into telepathy being done with tax monies. A long thread on that very topic raised several good points:
Reader denoir kicked off this thread with a sarcastic call to "invest some more tax money on finding UFOs, the Loch Ness Monster and inventing the perpetuum mobile!"
To this, reader misleb responded "I'm always been surprised at the kind of reaction anything labeled 'paranormal' gets from rational people. Why exactly couldn't telepathy exist? Is there some fundamental law of nature which states that two people cannot communicate over a distance without sound or visual cues? Obviously, you'd have to identify a mechanism for the communications. If telepathy exists, it isn't magic. ... If you had told someone from 200 years ago that you could communicate with people across the globe in real-time, they'd probably think you were some kind of sorcerer. But since then we've discovered radio waves..."
Reader Alsee has a satirical reponse: "Why exactly couldn't invisible pink unicorns exist? Is there some fundamental law of nature which states that invisible pink unicorns cannot exist? Obviously, you'd have to identify a mechanism for invisible pink unicorns. If invisible pink unicorns exist, it isn't magic. ... Telepathy, invisible pink unicorns, elves, Zeus, telekenesis, Narnia, rain dances, flying potions, the Tooth Fairy, I'm always surprised at the reaction of rational people when they think that these things do not exist."
Wavicle offers another reason for the widespread skepticism about such research:
"While there may be some out there shouting paranormal things couldn't possibly exist, most of us are just pissed. Pissed that for every genuinely deluded person who believed they had witnessed a paranormal event, there are 20 others out there looking at using it to scam people out of money.We have looked, and looked, and looked and come up empty handed EVERY TIME. The vast majority of the people who have said they had special powers were LIARS. The rest were just wrong. Nobody has ever passed muster. There are people out there doing genuine harm to others under the veil of paranormal abilities.
For example EVERY instance of 'psychic surgery' (where someone performs surgery with just their hands, leaving behind no scar or wound) has been a scam for money."
The same corner of the discussion led to a freewheeling exchange of comments on scientific credulity and exotic explanations for telepathy involving quantum mechanics.
Reader kfg writes "I am, at least nominally, a physicist. You wouldn't catch me saying any such thing as 'telepathy can't exist.' However, you first need to demonstrate that it does exist if you expect me to do work on that basis. If and when that happens I will not posit any 'paranormal' event, but rather that there is a quite normal mechanism at work. Then it will be my job to find it, because, at the moment, there is no valid theory of such a mechanism. ('Well, maybe it could be ...' is not a theory.) A theory is model that is concordence with data. ... Which brings us back to the need to show me it exists, particularly since everything I have ever seen so far indicates that the world works just spiffily in accordance with the rules of chance."
Reader Thing 1 asserts "if the human brain works on quantum principles, and one of those principles is communication at a distance, then that tells me that telepathy is possible," and mentions the phenomenon of entanglement as a mechanism for instantaneous communication: "Through a process, two electrons become 'entangled,' and when separated experimentally up to 10 km, when the spin on one is changed, the spin on the other is changed immediately--with no speed-of-light delay."
To this, reader aardvarkjoe responds that "The problem is that, in these 'entanglement experiments,' no information is being transmitted from the first site to the second. By measuring the state of the first electron, you can instantaneously affect the state of the second electron — but according to all of the current theories, there is no way to actually use that to communicate. (If that sounds weird ... it is. Quantum theory is rather unintuitive.)"
Several readers' comments were not about the experiment at issue in this case, but rather about the James Randi Educational Foundation prize I mentioned. Two comments in particular sum up many of the others: Reader nido calls Randi a fraud with an agenda" and says this is how Randi is viewed by "people who can," to which Mr2001 responds "Well, there's also the slight difference that he has facts on his side. None of these so-called 'people who can' have ever been able to demonstrate their alleged abilities under controlled conditions. Until they can do that, they're nothing more than 'people who lie to others,' or at best, 'people who lie to themselves.' ... It's a pity that there's no evidence that these experiences actually took place in reality, not just in the participants' imaginations, don't you think? Because if there were evidence, someone would be a million dollars richer."
Many thanks to everyone who took part in the discussion, in particular those readers whose comments are quoted above.
I think for the large part, the world of psychics is snake oil, predators preying on the gullible.
But, if you're familiar with the double-slit "interference" experiment, you may get an uneasy sense there is much for us to learn about interaction of particles, forces, energies, etc. It's not for me to determine ESP is real but I've experienced unexplainable phenomena at least to my level to understand.
One example, a very close friend in college, she was an identical twin, and talked about the typical entanglements with her twin, who was back in her hometown 200 miles away. Her twin came down on her birthday and I was there when they opened their cards, identical (and not with any "twin" theme... just random typical birthday cards). Not a HUGE example of unexplained communication, but at least odd.
There are things we don't know, and we don't even know we don't know. And, the more we learn, the less we know, at least that's been my paradox. Things that seemed black and white seem grayer as I learn more. (Consider this: can you really determine whether you cross a defined landmark by some predefined time? By what reference point? Can you really feel objects, considering no real contact is made and that the actual real occupied space in atoms is virtually nothing?)
Yeah, there's a lot we don't know about ESP, and may never learn -- though, you can be pretty sure those who say they know all about ESP don't.
... couple of wavy lines.
"The crows seemed to be calling his name, thought Caw."
As all the discussion about cheats indicates, "telepathy" is a word for some "magical" form of communication between people; given that we have lots of real-life means of communciation between people, and more and better ones coming out every year, it's almost certain that within a few decades humans will be communicating with one another via means that are essentially indistinguishable from classic telepathy.
That doesn't mean it was likely to have evolved naturally though. There does seem to be a whiff of real "irreducible complexity" in an iPod...
Energy: time to change the picture.
I thought the minimum number of posts for another article appearing the very next day is 800 posts. I guess someone is desperate for click through traffic.
This poster is a fraud. He did not 'sense' that this article was going to be on ESP. He is a suscriber and this allows him to see into the mysterious future. He then writes a long first post in the future and travels back in time to the present to get lots of karma. It is nothing to do with ESP!
I have proof! See the star next to his name!
I'll probably be modded down for this...
I'm always been surprised at the kind of reaction anything labeled 'paranormal' gets from rational people. Why exactly couldn't telepathy exist?
There's nothing logically impossible about the idea of telepathy. Or the Loch Ness Monster. Or UFOs.
The thing you need to realize, however, is that they're labeled 'paranormal' for a reason. If we had solid evidence of any of them, we'd call them scientific fact. People look down on these ideas because, while there may be some people who believe in them, rigorous studies haven't been able to substantiate any of them.
That being said, I don't see any reason there shouldn't be some continued research into these areas. The more basic research, the better, I say. What doesn't make sense, however, is sinking substantial amounts of money into research in areas that show no actual promise of ever turning up anything. Or, spending a lot of time doing non-scientific work in these areas. I'm sure paranormal enthusiasts can point to lots of "evidence" for telepathy. How much of it would actually stand up to scrutiny, though?
-- dR.fuZZo
If someone claims to have had a telepathic experience, it is not up to you to decide the validity of their experience. What irks me is people immediately dismissing such a person as a nutjob. There is certainly a lot more going on around us than we can directly sense, and anyone with any amount of intuition who is in touch with themselves has had experiences that demonstrate at least the possibility of "paranormal" awareness.
People with greater than average skill are always derided by the masses. Or, as Einstein put it: "Great thinkers will always face violent opposition from mediocre minds." Just because someone might be more perceptually evolved is no reason to cast them away.
Moreover, it is vastly ignorant of us to think we know everything there is to know about consciousness or any aspect of the physical world. As soon was we start thinking that way, the sooner the evolution of science stops.
We should honor this experiment, not immediately dismiss it. Yes, let's make sure rigorous checks are in place, and that the data is properly validated. But give it a chance, eh?
"Molest me not with this pocket calculator stuff."
- Deep Thought
I like these Backslashes better than nothing. They give Slashdot's editors a way to get some articulated grip on the stories Slashdot covers and Slashdotters' response to them. Which helps develop an editorial consciousness through which new stories are filtered before they're published.
But I wish it were less centralized. Slashdot is better than newspapers because it's mainly "letters to the editor", sparked by editors' published stories. Because those LoE's are letters to each other. Maybe the top 5% by moderated points, weighted by metamoderation and negative comments (also metamoderated), of posters to each day's top story or two (by comment count), could be autoinvited to a Backslash discussion among themselves, summarizing and highlighting comments. That competition might also encourage better comments.
--
make install -not war
I take it thta aardvarkjoe isn't married?
Plenty of information is transmitted when I'm entangled with my wife!!!
Opps! Shit, she's home! Gotta gooo..
I'm wondering. Should I pop some popcorn before reading the slashback?
I thought the minimum number of posts for another article appearing the very next day is 800 posts. I guess someone is desperate for click through traffic.
Obviously the editor has a strong premonition the other 400 were on the way!
I haven't had much of this lately, but I used to see before I'd be somewhere I'd never been, people in place and all. I wasn't sure it was the same as Deja Vu as I'd actually see these places in my dreams and be stunned when I saw them come together. I think something works, but I haven't had one of these episodes for years.
Score: -5 Daft?!? I didn't foresee that!
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
What are you trying to prove here anyway?
I'm studying the effects of negative reinforcement on E.S.P. ability.
The effect? I'll tell you what the effect is, it's pissing me off!
Developers: We can use your help.
When I was in high school I ran ESP tests on the kids in my psychology class. I had twenty five cards with five different symbols on them. I shuffled the deck and looked at each card and each student wrote down which symbol he/she though I was looking at. The cards were behind a bind so they would not be visible in any way to the class. I ran the test three times and collected the forms.
Everyone scored between four to six right answers except for one kid who on all three tests scored between twelve to fifteen correct answers.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
he had huge news and was going to call me later that night.
Advice: When someone says 'I was going to call you later' do not take it literally.
I'll probably be modded down for this...
I want my million dollars in small bills.
whether taxpayer money should be spent, probably not. My grandfather died and the same night I woke up telling my wife there is someone at the end of my bed. I remember it, didn't look like my grandfather but it was a person. It is real or memorex? Dunno, just know what happened. You probably couldn't test this in a controlled experiment. Even though there could be something about telepathy, etc., doesn't mean I want any tax dollars to go to it. Of course, I don't really want my tax dollars going to politicians but unfortunately I'm screwed there. Cheers
While I can understand the comments suggesting that using tax payers money for such an investigation is not worthwhile, I am totally flabergasted by the defensive posture adopted by so many. So many low-brow insults were tossed about, it made me feel sad. Discounting something as "obviously ludicrus", is fools talk. In science nothing is obvious, always be suspicious of any statement containing the word obvious. So many theories we now take for granted (and apply to modern industry) were once laughed at by the scientific establishment. Keep an open mind. I feel it very strange that people would suggest that because we have not discovered a phenomenon, or a mechanism to explain some phenomenon, then it does not exist. Using the course of logic, we have literally invented the world from scratch. Some people actually hold this to be true, but at least they have an internally coherent web of reasons. Also to note, some of the most balanced and insightful comments were moderated really low, so go through them if you want another dimension of the conversation.
Please see the videos on www.psipog.net - we exist
You'll understand why this comment:
have they hired a couple of good magicians skilled at 'mentalist' acts
is quite amusing. If you're not: Nothing to see here.
ZOMGWTFPWNtKKTHNXBIBI!!!ONE!111!!!
It was a couple of years ago, when I was still in high school, my science teacher was friends with him. He took questions from the class; the most insightful thing that I garnered from the whole experience was that the million dollars isn't attainable. Don't take this the wrong way, i'm not saying that telepathy or anything else definately doesn't exist. The only way to claim the million dollars is to find something that cannot be explained rationally, and explain it rationally. If said 'thing' is explained, it is no longer eligible. He might as well offer a billion dollars.
Okay, I don't actually believe that systems are consciously projecting their thoughts in to your mind. But it does freak people out slightly when you expect a system to do something nobody expected - then it does. Colleagues start wondering if you're psychic or something. I think if you spend enough time looking at stuff on your systems, you get a feel for what may happen and when, even if you can't offer a great deal of proof.
Ever heard a tune in your mind then switched on the radio and it was there? Maybe your hearing is better than you think. Sometimes, in buildings really close to powerful transmitters, otherwise inanimate objects demodulate the broadcasts in to audible sound.
My hyperlinks aren't worth the paper they're printed on.
Okian Warriors argument is sound at first, but the argument, I think, unravels when you ask: "How is telepathy genetic?" Since we don't know how telepathy works, it's odd to assume that there would be a genetic component.
For example, what if telepathy worked only when you were standing at a particular location? When you moved, no more telepathy. This would clearly be an environmental factor NOT genetic.
BTM
That was the turning point of my life--I went from negative zero to positive zero.
There are rare conditions that cause things like rubbery skin to exist in one of a million people, and regardless of how advantageous or disabling rubbery skin may be, it's not passed on from father to son. It appears, it disappears. Telepathy or empathy may exist in one individual and not be an inheritable trait...
If we make the relatively trivial assumption that telepathy would require a relatively high level of brain function (both as a matter of technical requirement, and also of being able to process and understand the information) then suddenly the point in our evolution it would be most possible for these traits to begin to appear we have already began stagnating our gene pool by artificially protecting those of weaker traits, thus significantly reducing any evolution.
If we look through recorded time, and due to our nature likely much before recorded time as well, people who can 'hear voices' or otherwise know things they should not be able to know are typically regarded as crazy, devilspawn, witches, or some other name in which heavy medication, stoning, or burning at the stake would be prescribed. I would pose that because of this, not only would telepathy not be a survival advantage, any marked ability would indeed be a disadvantage.
IMO it's also very realistic to assume telepathy would be like other ability, and require some practice and training before it would be any more than rare and involuntary flashes of thoughts.
Shoot Pixels, Not People!
A psychoactive drink from the Amazon called Ayahuasca is known for creating group visions, and drinkers of the brew often report of telepathic experiences.
People always like to bring up QM, especially entanglement, when talking about magical things like FTL travel or communication, super-duper-duper-computers, and time travel. Now it's telepathy too? Nice.
Quantum Mechanics is not magic. It's also not dimly understood. It is counterintuitive, but that doesn't mean that it somehow turns black into white.
The big problem with QM is how people write about it. With the double-slit experiment, for example, you'll read a phrase like "when you observe which slit each photon goes through, the interference patterns disappear". The problem is, most people think of observation as something completely passive. But in the realm of QM, observation is very active and very destructive. In QM-speak, it goes without saying that to observe something is to change it. If the above phrase were written "when you jigger with each photon to try to get an idea of which slit it goes through, the interference pattern vanishes", it would be equally accurate and sound a lot less magical. A pretty pattern of waves on the surface of a pond will vanish if you jump into the pond to get a look at the waves up close.
Entanglement is described with equal misguidance. Usually you get a phrase like "when you measure measure one photon of the entangled pair, the other one's spin changes instantly across any distance to match". Sounds magical, right? But it ain't. The spin "changes" from a state where it has all possible values with equal probability of each into a state where you know what the value of that spin is. QM is all about probabilities and information and not so much about the actual particles. Instead of saying "the particle's spin changes", it would be more correct to say "what we know about the particle's spin changes". But instead we get shorthand that is clear to anyone who groks QM but is counterintuitive to the layman. By observing your electron (and remember, observing means you've destroyed information in it by getting the spin information out), you've gained some information about it. Because of the entanglement, you've also gained information about the other memeber of the pair, without disturbing it, at that very moment, no matter where the other member of that pair is. That's it.
Fun with Anagarams! LADS HOST, SHALT DOS. HAS DOLTS. AD SLOTHS, HATS SOLD. ASS HO, LTD.
A few points that came to mind as I read the above...
Haven't been slapped: women I find attractive, as a rule, do not have telepathy
Depending on what you find attractive in women, chances are that such women will also be attractive to others. In that event, I believe they'd be somewhat immune due to constant hinting thoughts of passerby.
Taxpayer's money: research into the mystical and supernatural isn't strictly illegal it is certainly a questionable use of taxpayer money
How many expeditions across the world, expected to fall off the "edge" were funded by what would have then been something similar to taxpayer's money?
Why exactly couldn't invisible pink unicorns exist?
There's a likelyhood to all things, as well as a case history. Cases of various paranormal events exceed those of invisible pink unicorn reports (although how something can be pink when invisible?). It leaves the possibility of lots of crazy people, lots of easily influenced/misled people (more likely), or the possibility that various paranormal circumstances may exist. Lots of things that would have been 'witchcraft' or paranormal years back are commonplace. I suppose the trade-off is in exactly how much money is spent vs the results received.
By measuring the state of the first electron, you can instantaneously affect the state of the second electron -- but according to all of the current theories, there is no way to actually use that to communicate
Why not? If you can in any how tell that the state of the second electron has been altered, and you could consistently alter/un-alter/re-alter the second electron, you could transfer binary data... with the limits being on how quickly one could read the changes given or affect a change.
It's a pity that there's no evidence that these experiences actually took place in reality, not just in the participants' imaginations, don't you think
Which leads to a previous statement. Not everyone is a liar, some people honestly (but mistakenly) believe in a paranormal ability or event that may have an existing scientific explanation beyond their own knowledge. Of course, some other unexplainable/supernatural events over time have become normal scientific data as science progressed as well.
One thing I do wonder is about experiments done with twins (quite a few interesting cases of people having an unusual 'connection' there), and experiments vs situations of duress. Sure, a million bucks is a nice incentive, but if one did have an invisible supernatural transmitter in one's head... say a weak one... a life-threatening situation might just be the thing that squeezes out the juice in it, and that's not really something that can be (legally) simulated. Certainly there are cases where humans put in "impossible" situations have gone beyond what science dictated should be possible.
If you read the PEAR research they are reporting extremely small telekinetic effects. Basically they acquire data from a noise source and devise someway of generating ones and zeros at a 5 hz rate. The "operator" is supposed to think of ones or zeros in an attempt to skew the results. The "success" rate is something like %50.02 from the expected of %50. Not very impressive results and probably explainable by temperature variations, cosmic rays or maybe even the odd neutrino detections.
I think they ought to have a World Wide Telekinetic Westling Federation where they pit two cerebral pro's against each other in ring with a noise generator between them; each combatant would either have with a big 0 or 1 on his jersey. After the bell the cumulative results in big readable digital displays in real-time above their heads.
The Experiment
Many readers pointed out flaws in the experiment, it was not controlled enought to the point that any results from it would be completely invalid and would only play into the hands of the crackpots.
Proving Telepathy doesn't exist
Althought it is not possible to "prove that something doesn't exist", it is possible to show that the consequences of something existing would disagree and conflict with present knowledge and would lead to absurd consequences - reductio ad absurdum et al...
For example it was pointed out that the absense of any unexplained evolutionary advantages that could be due to telepathy existing, does strongly suggest that telepathy is very unlikely to exist (or that most of our knowledge of evolutionanary and behavioural biology is outright wrong).
Some people were desperately clutching straws by suggesting that since we do not know everything (the weirdness of double-slit-interference-experiment e.g.), that we should give the benefit of the doubt to such experiments. However this same argument could be made of any unexplained/unknown phenomenon, pink unicorns, elves, Narnia etc. and is therefore irrelevant since resources for research are finite.
Some people went as far as to suggest mechanisms for how telepathy might work: unknown signals, quantum effects etc. to justify the research. The psychology behind such attempt is imply credibility where there is none. If you cannot devise a method of testing such phenomenon then the value of them, however 'based on science', is nill. Indeed, this should be the very definition of pseudo-science.
Science and Magic
Although I'm often called a strict spectic I find science and biology magical and exiting just because of all the things we don't know. However I'm dismayd by the lack of cricitical mind and imagination that people have. There are plenty of magic left even after you ignore all these weak speudo science ideas.
For example how do oyster and various sea creatures know the phases of the moon when all apparent external signals are blocked and their location is moved thousends of miles? How do birds use geomagnetic fields for navigation and what is the sensitivity and selectivity of their receivers? Or do they have a long endurance inertial navigation system coupled to terrain mapping when available? Even a three year old can devise experiments for these phenomenon and learn volumes about the secret of nature...
www.tribalnetworks.org - helping tribal people around the world to own their own means of high-tech communications
Umm, I have to point out two things...
One, evolutionary pressures do not cause mutations, period. Mutations are either beneficial or detrimental, depending on evolutionary pressure. Just because telepathy might exist in primitive hunter/gathers puts no pressure on prey animals to block their thoughts, as it were. Evolutionary pressure would however favor those individuals expressing the ability to block their thoughts. The fact of telepathy in a predator does not stimulate the ability to block thought in the prey, it does favor prey that develop such an ability via mutation.
Two, I don't think telepathy is a reasonable mutation to achieve, certainly not within a single species. I'd suggest telepathy would be the end result of evolutionary pressure favoring empaths whose abilities are closer to true telepathy.
Empathy is not a favorable mutation in a hunter/gatherer. I don't know about you, but I'd hate to fell the pain of all my prey...
There have been accounts of people (or couples of people) whom have a strong "sense" of precognition, of people who have a strong emotional/mental connection over distances (such as twins, etc), and of places that have a resonance (hauntings, stonehenge, etc).
Indeed, both person-associated (genetic or chance) phenomenoa have been said to occur, as well as environmental/locational.
How many people's grandfather's died and they didn't see someone at the end of the bed? Or, even better, How many people saw something at the end of the bed and--no one had died? Who knows though, maybe you're just special...in your own special way.
Before you die, you see DoubleRing...
:-) I'm actually not really trying to be funny.
...
Some "coincidences" do occur for many people often everyday mainly because of our own intuitive processes and subconscious processes picking up a lot more subtleties than our conscious minds are aware of - is this "telepathy" per se? Probably not, but many people make a very good business out of reading others almost as good as the real thing. Even then, our subconscious minds pick up so much of what we don't that often we'll get excited about something bad that happens because it might have affected a loved one - sometimes nothing happens, yet other times, you're glad you checked. Sometimes a last-minute reflex saves your ass from death - I'm pretty sure everyone has at least one of those stories, and I'm positive that most people have a lot more than one. Think about that! We evolved through unspoken communication and split-second deductive logic. ESP, or just good heuristic hypotheses generation in our brains? Both? Who knows, but think about the fact that we're able to communicate complex ideas to each other through small chunks of black-on-white markings.
Gosh, Neal Stephenson, Joseph Campbell, and Neil Gaiman should be so proud
--I gots 99 problems but a new machine ain't one!
AMD! Asus! Whoot! 6 years!
I much ratter they spend my tax money studing telepathy theories than developing new weapons and general means of murdering people.
Then again, that's just me. And, like you, I'm screwed there.
morcego
One thing I wonder: what if those paranormal phenomena are actually glitches in our perception of the world? Remember that the conscious mind is aware of only fractions of the actual input. The subconscious is full of wonders. This goes all the way down to the question whether the world actually behaves like our understanding of causality. If causality is actually a simplification constructed by our mind, then there might be a chance that there are situations where this approximation is just plain wrong.
Of course, this raises some serious question about how to verify this in an experiment.
This sig does not contain any SCO code.
Soo... you're telling me, all of you, that you have never been able to sense someone looking at you?
:)
When someone pulls past you on the road, you can't look over and see them quickly turning their head back forward?
Alright, I guess I can buy that.
But it happens to me all the time. I turn to look at someone and see them turn their head away from me. All the time
" Reader Pyromage provided one answer to that question, writing: ... Such an experiment does not -- even in theory -- exist for [Intelligent Design].""
:
"Because it's possible to devise an experiment that could provide scientific evidence in its favor.
I replied that
I don't think it would be too hard to come up an experiment that could falsify a particular stain of ID.
First, we'll define an impersonal ID: the intelligent designer is simply a phenomena that is intelligent, like a human being or other intelligent animal. Not that we're saying that this creator has a body, or is organic, wears a crown, writes on stone tablets, or anything else; just that it is an intelligent phenomena.
Second, we'll have to define a criteria for detecting intelligence. This is essentially the same project as SETI. We've recieved lots of interesting radio signals from outer space; the problem is, we have no definition or set of criteria to distinguish signals arising from intelligent activity from other natural, even biological phenomena. We have some signals that *might* be from life, but then again they might not. If we had a criteria, we'd have a better idea. But we don't. So, once we do have the set of criteria, we could easily apply that to any observable phenomena.
Here's the example experiment. We'll look at the background radiation from the big bang, and we'll see if it meets the criteria for intelligence. If the background radiation meets the criteria for a signal arising from intelligent activity, then we know that the phenomena that created the universe is somehow intelligent. (Obviously that doesn't mean that the Bible is completely true, etc. etc). If we can somehow determine that we have the *only* criteria for intelligence, then if the background radiation does not meet that criteria, we will then know for certain that there was no intelligence involved at or around the beginning of the universe.
An old argument for the existance of God is that the heavens act very much like a watch -- the motions of the heavenly bodies are so precise, an intelligence must have created the system. It would be like finding a watch on the ground on a desert island and not thinking that a person had dropped it there. Obviously we now know that the planets aren't as graceful and watch-like as they seem to be. But essentially this is the same test. If we can decide what intelligence is, and a set of criteria for determining if a phenomena is influence by intelligence, then we can test for ID.
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
-- Pablo Picasso
Consider this scenario: You're in the public place. You see the woman. You look her up-and-down and think, "Hey now." The woman turns around and sees you looking her over and thinks, "Gads. What a jerk." Well, obviously, there was no telepathy involved here. She saw you looking at her like a hungry dog at a piece of meat and immediately knew what you were thinking. But what made her turn around at that moment? Was it just a coincidence? Obviously, it had to be. There's no way she could have known what you were thinking.
Or, her "sixth sense" told her there was a potential mate/threat/whatever. Automatic reaction was to look around for it. When she saw you looking her over, she figured she'd found the target of the problem (since the feelings went away) and the rest of her senses allowed her to form a better picture of what was happening and since she never really knew why she was looking around (lower brain function caused the reaction), she wouldn't chalk it up to telepathy.
Remember, there are tons of things that we do that we don't consciously do. A simple example is we pull our hands away from hot things. There's no conscious decision there. We know why we did it, sure, but there was no higher-brain decision process involved.
I thought this was interesting...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundredth_Monkey
I predict that copying and pasting +5 comments from the previous discussion will result in quick and easy karma.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
... by at least 3. I would have posted by slashdot was broken.
:)
The only comment I remember trying to make was that my wife tends to know what's on my mind, but that's because she's known me for over 10 years and my thoughts in that area are pretty predictable
No, your computer works based on principles a little higher up the scale than quantum principles. And when they do make computers that are based on quantum principles, they'll be able to work without too deep an understanding of what actually goes on at the quantum level, because of a sort of cumulative effect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qubit
My experiement would probably involve about 400ug of LSD. Seriously though, as someone who's done a fair share of psychedelics, I've had experiences that have proven to my standards that telepathic ability is very real. Nothing that could be mistaken as a drug-induced delusion, but very clear-cut examples. Coupled with several instances of visuals shared by more than one person, it's clear to me that the psychedelic experience is much more than just the neurons in your own head firing.
It's called Las Vegas.
Precognition: roulette
clairvoyance: poker, black jack
Telekinesis: dice
The fact that Las Vegas still exists as a gambling mecca suggests that these types of ESP are not common in humans.
Conversely, if you want to find a promising set of test subjects for ESP experiments, get the "banned from" lists from the various casinos,-- remembering to exclude the obvious cheaters.
I agree with other posters. Any ESP is probably associated with predator/prey behavior. (I swear, a girl can tell if I'm looking at her tits from a mile away, behind sunglasses, and in a moving car.) Tests should be designed involving predator/prey relations, not abstract or boring pictures.
I know of at least one experiment that is totally scientific and genuine, which proves that our minds and capable of a bit more than what we think.
This experiment involves showing a series of images in a random order on a monitor to the subjects, whose brains are being monitored. Some of those images are shocking. It is confirmed that brains start responding a few milliseconds *before* a shocking image appears. However the person remains unaware of it untill the image actually comes up.
Those who are interested can search for this one. The experimentors are perfectly sane scientists and results made it to reputed journals (iirc).
God created man in his own image, but somehow he evolved into a hairless monkey.
I'm not claiming that it "proves" anything but I do find it interesting.
Let me be clear, I don't mean that when all of his answers were totaled up he scored twelve to fifteen. If memory serves he scored twelve on his first test, fourteen on his second and fifteen on his third.
I'll let someone else give us the odds on that but it doesn't take a genius to know that those scores are WAY above what would be expected. With five different shapes on the cards one would expect to guess 1 out of five correctly so five correct guesses out of twenty five would be the norm.
I can only think of three possible explanations.
1.He just beat the incredible odds. (Not too likely)
2.He found a way to cheat. (Not too likely. I was careful and he was near the back of the class.)
3.He has ESP.
Of the three possibities I believe the third. He told me that his family bought some kind of ESP game when he was younger and that they played it a lot. He also said that he got better at guessing the correct answers. This suggests to me that ESP may be developed.
But proof. No. He could have got 75 out of 75 correct and it still wouldn't "prove" anything. It is interesting however.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
I, for one, have evidence telepathy exists. I personally have no abilities but my, now ex, girlfriend definitely did. She would, at times, be able to describe, in reasonable detail, something I was merely thinking about even when what I was thinking was not something she had ever actually seen.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Alright, by reading this backlash, I am appalled at some of the reactions I saw. The one most annoying was the telepathy vs invisible pink unicorns. Firstly, due to the way it was written (copied from the parent post with replacing "telepathy" with the unicorns, the sentences are either gramatically incorrect, or just plain don't make sense. Secondly though, is the simply that the parent thread is well thought through, and instead of pointing our problems with it, the unicorn breeder there just satires it. This harkens back to a saying I've heard before, "Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Granted, the human mind isn't tech in the strictest sense, but it still follows similar properties that keep the analogy valid. Secondly, the one that fought the idea of the electron entanglement, blaming the uncertainty principle. If you measure the electron, you can affect the results. Does this make the results wrong? NO! Uncertain does not mean wrong, just uncertain. If you measure it, and it affects it, with 2 possible outcomes, probability ITSELF dictactes that half of the trials will come out as the spin should've been read, and half won't. We can't differentiate which is wrong, just that the reading isn't valid due to the fact we've changed it. Does that mean no information is being transfered? No, just no decently readable information. But in this case, if we change its spin, and scan the other one, to see if it changed, and 100% of the scans say, "the spin has changed", that's one heck of an uncertainty. If the chance of a different answer is less than 10%, when it should be 50%, then it isn't exactly all that uncertain, is it? Anyway, as for original information in the post, why do people think UFOs, telepathy, and bigfoot don't exist? Am I going to back up their sure existence? Of course not, but the fact that people insult it to the point that if it is deemed "paranormal" it can't be true, needs to addressed. UFOs, well, if you believe in evolution, WE evolved here, what is to say some other race on some other planet didn't do the same? If your religious (well, in this case Christian, I don't know the Genesis of most other religions very well), as much as it is a stretch, the Bible NEVER says that he did this only once, or on one planet. Just as much as the word used for "day" actually translates closer to the day used in the phrase, "Back in the day...", notice that the E, at least in the NIV is not capitalized in earth. Earth without a capital simply means, dirt. For all we know, the garden of Eden wasn't even on the Earth we know of, since we've never found a trace of it (or the Ark for that matter, but that's another story), it could have been somewhere else in the universe, and being kicked out just sent us to the planet we currently know of as Earth, but other beings maybe sent elswhere. I mean, like when Cain was banished, he was sent somewhere called Nod or something... but Adam and Eve should've been the only people in existance, so the only civilized area should've been... well, their house. But anyway, that's another argument entirely. Who says the creation of aliens, divine or not, had to happen before or after us? They could've done it a few thousand years ago, and their technology is advanced enough to be used to make what we see as flying saucers? We aren't too far from making our own, only another hundred years or so until we can do something similar, I would think. Bigfoot, well, I don't find much credibility in it, but I say, the sheer fact that we have found lifeforms on this planet that we didn't think exist, just because we HAVEN'T looked everywhere, proves that he MIGHT exist (or might just be some deranged circus freak hermit or something). Just think of some of the animals and plants in remote rainforests, or the ocean floor. But the main one here is telepathy. Now, I have with me this device, a wonderous thing we call the "cellular phone." Now this device causes electrons to move along a piece of metal in such a way to creat s
And it all got jumbled togther... wow... come on, if I hit [enter], I at least expect that to be listened to... didn't think I'd need to preview for something that has been in use in word processing programs since 1985. I assure you there is spacing between the different subjects.
Just want to get something out of the way... for the people who are saying "this is just as likely as believing in UFOs," you may be right on target: please distinguish Unidentified Flying Objects (which we know exist) from Alien Spacecraft (which we don't). Thankyouverymuch.
Anyhow, I recommend people check out Parapsychology: The Controversial Science by Richard S. Broughton, PhD. It gives a good overview of the current state of the field.
What seems to be true is that there is strong evidence to suggest parapsychological factors at work. Strong in that it's remarkably consistent, but it isn't a huge deviation from chance. So where chance would predict a given outcome (like a coin toss) at 50%, parapsychology tests have shown results of (fr'ex) 51 or 52%. So it's not a huge, obvious deviation, but it's consistent and certainly suggests that something is happening.
As to claims of falsification, most parapsychologists are well aware of the disdain with which they're viewed by most of the scientific community, so they're actually more careful and attentive than would be typical. There's less chance for error or falsification in most parapsych tests than in pretty much any other scientific discipline. A number of skeptics (notably James Randi and other members of CSICOP) have tried to demonstrate how some of these tests could have been falsified, but they usually involve gymnastic skill, intimate advanced knowledge of building layouts, and are often so convoluted that Occam's Razor would suggest the veracity of psychic phenomena. In fact, many parapsychologists are themselves "skeptics": "someone undecided as to what is true." They joined the field without a pre-existing belief in the paranormal and have discovered that there is, in fact, something at work.
The Wikipedia entry on Parapsychology, while a little sparse on references, does fair coverage of the subject.
Soylens viridis homines es
One thing I think people are failing to take into account (I am probably going to get flack from people who believe everything that exists in this universe can be explained and documented)is certain things that happen in this universe cannot be understood on the level of mind. The mind is just a tool to get us though life while we are here on earth. (if you believe in an afterlife) So there is a possibility that there could be something within us that is beyond this world and we are not going to always be able to test for that in a way we have been accustom to. But to outright deny that things like this do not exist and to create resistance to it really shows that you are unable to exist outside the constrains of the mind, which could change in some point in the future. Consciousness (shear presence and all that goes with it, which is beyond name and form can exist with out the mind) so if you accept the analogy that you have a mind, and another presence deep within your body, existing within and without this reality. When you get intouch with that source it will always give you a reflection of the truth (every feel like you knew something by just how you feel inside, but didn't know why?). You dont always need the mind to give you a clear understanding of what is going on around you, and frankly it just can get in the way of living a life with out fear and compassion because you are consistently comparing what is happening now, with what has happened in the past. Thats what the mind does, its a computer that compares based on experiences. For things otherworldly, its just not the proper tool to use.
That being said, I do think we need to reach a certain level of consciousness before we are able to fully realize our full potential. The evolutionary stage we are in is a temporary thing, and we need to move on to the next level before we are able to become aware of things paranormal.
There is a very good proof against ESP.... every card game at every casino in the world is a GIANT ESP disproof!!!! $$$ earnings from card games at Casinos are EXACTLY due to the laws of probability..... they know very well how much they are going to make, over any given period. If there was EVEN A LITTLE bit of ESP, those earnings would be skewed slightly. No such thing. Probability straight down the line.
From the summary: Other responses to the story show that at least many Slashdot readers are none too happy with research into telepathy being done with tax monies.
I made a comment about this the last time around, pointing out that despite the prevalent Slashdotter belief, this pseudoscientific research is privately funded. Here's a paste of what I said before:
I'm pretty sure there isn't any tax payer money involved. According to this page, the project is sponsored by a Portuguese group called the "Bial Foundation" (google translated link). A bit of googling turned up this
Here's another description:
Aims : To encourage the scientific study of Man, from both the physical and spiritual perspectives, by honouring, supporting and promoting the work and efforts of all those who seek out new paths along the route of Research, Science and Knowledge.
General Information : The Bial Foundation was created in 1994. Classified as an institution of public utility by the Portuguese Government, the Bial Foundation includes among its patrons the Portuguese President, the Portuguese Universities Rectors' Council and the Portuguese Medical Association.
(Granted, I'm a little dubious about the last sentence there)
1. Post an unskeptical story about telepathy research.
2. Select the most controversial comments.
3. Post story about controversial comments.
4. Three question marks.
5. Traffic!!!
Good job, timothy. I expect to see a lot more or your stories about gay marriage, abortion, and flag burning being posted on the main page. Keep up the dubious work.
If you can read this sig, you're too close.
Hopefully you guys will have ABSOLUTELY NO problem with my nickname. I'm not a physicist; I'm only a high-school student with an interest in both physics and parapsychology, and I'd like to join the fray.... (Scientific American November 2005 and Michael Talbot's book The Holographic Universe, 1991) Holographic physics takes the idea of holograms and applies it to the entire universe as a whole. The universe can be regarded as a hologram, which can store pretty much as much information as you can in a tiny space using lasers and advanced optical stuff. If you cut a hologram of an apple into small pieces, you can still regenerate the entire image of the apple with only a single piece, albeit the image is much less clear - but you can still distinguish that it's an apple. Every single piece of the hologram contains all the informatioin contained in the entire piece of hologram. This way, a person (somehow) can tap into this reservoir of information in the space-time fabric and (somehow) gain information through what we call "telepathy" or "clairvoyance" or "precognition". So no information is sent from anyone to anyone else, and thus quantum entanglement is not required, and special relativity is not violated either. If you are interested, you can come to my blog at http://mtelepathic.blogspot.com/ Also, someone said that there's ABSOLUTELY NO evidence of ESP WHATSOEVER. Please; every single SAT review book says that "ALWAYS AVOID STRONG PHRASES LIKE 'EVERY' OR 'ABSOLUTELY'". If one hasn't checked all the information about every single experiment conducted in every single nook and cranny of the world, one should never say that there is no evidence whatsoever. That is a fumblerule.
"While I can understand the comments suggesting that using tax payers money for such an investigation is not worthwhile, I am totally flabergasted by the defensive posture adopted by so many. So many low-brow insults were tossed about, it made me feel sad. Discounting something as "obviously ludicrus", is fools talk."
That's because science is the new religion. People get defensive when you attack their "religion". One may feel that science shouldn't be treated so, but in this age of humanism the void needs to be filled. And science is it.
Personally, I find "mind reading" to be utterly falacious. As others have pointed out, evolution would have heavily favoured even a very slight ability in this regard.
Also, the question needs to be asked: what physical property of the universe would allow the miniscule electrical signals in human brains to be able to be receieved and understood by persons disconnected in space? Even if only by a few millimetres? To me (at least) it seems unlikely there is this unknown quality of the universe. It seems likely we would have discovered it by mistake already.
Of more concern to me is what I call "cultural experience" or "group consciousness" and it has nothing to do with mind reading or telepathy as it is normally thought of.
Briefly, it is the ability of humans to easily achieve something which people have tried for a long time to do. For example" the backflip on a wind surfer or a bicycle. Many people tried for a very long time to achieve this, without success, and yet, as soon as one person, somewhere manages to do it, there seems to be (independently! And without prior knowledge) a sudden surge in people doing it.
It's almost like there is some ethereal pool of human knowledge, where the knowledge of the ABILITY to perform some "trick", is stored, allowing other people's attempts to be successful also.
To me, this certainly seems to be more than "It's amazing how much you can do when you haven't been told what you can't do". It's like "If someone else has done it, but you don't know they've done it, you will find it much easier to do for yourself."
Then again - it might all just be sheer coincidence, and I don't need to try and explain some concept of "gaia" or similar weird "ether" that exists in our universe yet is totally undetectable by science to date.
How many escape pods are there? "NONE,SIR!" You counted them? "TWICE, SIR!"
Why you get the results you do.
. low.html
n t
Double-slit experiment
http://www.whatthebleep.com/trailer/doubleslit.wm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experime
~hylas
I can replicate all those videos... not even with camera tricks, just some basic methods which you would kick yourself if you knew how they were done. It's basics of show magic.
Meh.
What is telepathy? Telepathy is the ability to use one's mind to transmit thoughts between individuals.
Of course, there's no reason the brain should be able to do this by itself. If there's telepathy, then there could be special organs or parts of the brain devoted to telepathy. And clearly there would have to be some sort of physical method - because information can't be sent through quantum entanglement, let's assume that there's some sort of "invisible" waves that carry it.
Clearly, such an ability is very powerful evolutionarily. Thus, if humans are capable of being telepathic, one would expect most humans to be strongly telepathic - because years of evolution will favor the stronger telepaths.
So what do we get? A pervasive method of communicating thoughts and ideas through invisible waves that may use special organs.
In short, humans are telepathic - it's called speech, people.
"maybe the ability depends heavily on the environment and situation"
Yes, and if you ask Randi he will tell you that magic tricks are also heavily dependent on the environment and situation. (The rest of the post is not aimed at you personally)
How Randi helped me see the light (a bedtime story):
Thirty odd years ago I dropped out of high school with reasonably good marks in science, shortly after this Uri Geller appered on my TV and started bending spoons and such. He conducted an "experiment" with the TV audience where he asked everyone who had access to a broken watch to hold it in their hand. I did this and watched as Uri mustered his best concentration expression and stared into the camera for about 30 seconds, lo and behold my watch that had not ticked for more than two years was now ticking away and kept running for several minutes only to break down again.
I was hooked, and over the next four years collected a shelf full of books describing all sorts of paranomal observations and theories. I belived every word of it, after all the books were written by people with letters behind their names and had a large number of refrencess in the back that sounded very scientific and impressive.
One day I picked up a small paperback by a magician (Randi) who claimed to be able to explain all of this as mere trickery. I was skeptical but decided to read it because I had so far not read anything to counter the claims of these "scientific" books and magazines. That slim paperback taught me more about the scientific method than 10yrs of public schooling. I became a rabid sceptic and started to learn how to spot the "psuedo" in the science. Ten years later I obtained a BSc in computer science and now consider myself very literate in what was once called "natural philosophy". (To those who say Randi is in it for the money/fame, I say you have not done your research).
For a while I became convinced that science could (eventually) tell us exactly how the universe works and was a devoted atheist. About 15 years ago I became interested in philosophy and eventually came to the conclusion that although science is the most usefull and productive philosophy we have ever invented it is still ultimately based on the faith that what we perceive via our senses is in fact the "real world". Fining out that it is IMPOSSIBLE to ever really understand yourself (let alone the universe) is ironically a great relief and is (IMO) why so many people simply put their faith in an omnipotent God rather than following the long and tourturous route I took.
Disclaimer: Telepathy is not impossible but after decades of research it has never been observed in a controlled environment. From this logic and the theory of evolution it would seem that telepathy is very unlikely, so unlikely that it is virtually indistinguishable from impossible.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
The paranormal has had three centuries to demonstrate it exists. How many more centuries of statistical noise should be gathered before we state that we are as certain as experiment allows to say it has absolutely no basis in fact?
Suppose, for a moment, that Telepathy was a normal phenomena, a skill that anyone could access. However would the earth's self-appointed ruling class keep the roiling masses in line?
For example, could George W. Bush's handlers have pushed the populace into initially accepting the necessity of invading Iraq, if most of us could tell telepathically that the alledged WMDs were a bald-faced propaganda ploy?
No, I think the 'paranormal' proves itself, and such proof must be violently suppressed by those who wish to maintain the power structure status quo. Government Schools and a scientific establishment greatly assist this ambition. See my other posts in this and the other story.
Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
www.teslabox.com
But my siblings and I _regularly_ buy my parents the same cards from occaision to occaision.
I think it's partly due to the fact that we already know what kind of card a person wants (funny, mushy, religious, plain), and there usually isn't much selection turn-over from year to year.
Have you ever picked up the same card for someone's birthday like 3 times in a row? I have. WHY DON'T THEY FIND NEW PEOPLE TO MAKE CARDS ANYWAY? Ugh.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
And you only remember the times when there was a correlation.
(And at certain points in your life, news that seems life changing is silly in retrospect)
That last comment isn't supposed to be a barb, since I don't know how old you are. Just a thought...
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
Screw the double slit experiment.
Why do photons spontaneously turn into particle/anti-particle pairs (with increasing probability with increasing energy?)
No one "knows". But since the laws of thermodynamics allow it, and as long as energy is conserved, it happens.
No one "knows" why particles do any of the things they do. We just develop models that explain all the behavior and provide a framework that makes useful predictions.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
Seeing as this is an article about another article's comments, a post about Slashdot and it's users is very relevant.
It appears that Slashdot's editors and the vast majority of it's users have a very strong opinion against the possibility of telepathy. They refer to anyone even just considering the possibility of such a phenomenon as "these people", "charlatans", "nutcases", "wasters of taxpayer's money", etc, going so far as to compare it to the study of intelligent design. That doesn't make sense to me, as telephathy is easily scientifically testable, whereas intelligent design is not, so I don't get the comparison, but that's beside the point. Anyway, what I find interesting is that I think something can be said about the population of Slashdot which makes them so virulently, irrationaly hostile towards any possibility of telepathy.
The Slashdot crowd are self-proclaimed nerds and geeks, and for the most part take science as a religion, and fantasy as a method for escaping reality. This obsession with science-fiction/fantasy could be attributed as an escape from the simple and depressing view on reality they you locked yourself into, encapsulating every last bit of it into science, slaughtering your soul upon the alter of science, even though science is not a religion, but a tool - science springs from reality, not the other way around.
Whenever ADHD or Asperger's syndrome comes up, you nerds and geeks boil with excitment and joy relating your experiences categorizing yourself into the ranks of the diseased, so as to explain away your anti-social behavior as well as your fears of relating with the opposite sex. Why do you nerds and geeks so fear a phenomenon that implies that another person can know your inner private lives? You do not understand yourself, and you are afraid to understand yourself, and you loath the thought that someone else could understand you more than you do, and flash a spotlight in your dark, moldy corner, showing that you are simply an automaton and not the savior of humanity you subconsiously imagine yourself to be.
Telepathy may or may not exist, but a lot more can be told about a person based on careful observation than you may think, before any telepathy is involved.
There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
Dream memory and the long term areas of the brain can be notoriously unreliable.
I'd feel differently if you had kept a dream journal or something and could pinpoint to it, but I'd have to point back at Deja Vu.
Deja Vu is a bitch. It can taint all your sensory input and short term memory with the "seen before/long term memory" paintbrush and totally fuck you up.
You start reeling, trying to remember where you saw this stuff before, and you end up randomly correlating details with things you remember from meditation or dreams (or things you THINK you remembered from dreams, PM me about that) and post-hoc formulate that you fore-saw the events in the past.
I always hate when it happens. It makes me feel out of control of my own head.
THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
If you think that chicks don't notice you noticing them, and that they don't know what you are thinking, then you are saddly mistaken, and that explains why you are still a virgin.
There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
Evolution has no mechanism for magically making all beneficial possible traits appear. All it does have is a mechanism for selecting in favour of random mutations that are beneficial, and against random mutations that are negative (which is most of them)
Telepathy is very obviously physically possible. We have it. It's called talking. Problem is, it has limited range, can be disturbed by noise, and other animals, if prey or predators, have detectors for it. We can minimize detection by being silent.
Physically, it'd be equally possible to imagine a biological organism communicating by, for example, radio. It'd have the same problems/advantages. There'd be limited range. There'd be disturbances. And if there was an easy way to evolve it, there's no reason to think that your prey/predators wouldn't have it too, which would negate some of the advantage.
Maybe it's just me but I think the longer people interact with each other they develop a 'connection'. Like the energy between people become shared kind of like soul-networking. When this builds they become more in-tune with each others psyche. Like when one person thinks of something totally obscure but may not express it out loud for whatever reason then immediately another person would openly express the same obscure thought, leaving the first person boggled and saying "I was just thinking that!" and a bit upset they didn't say it first. Also instances of thinking about someone, either a good friend or someone you haven't seen in a while, then they call you in a matter of seconds. I have had many discussions about this and most people like to go the "coincidence" route. I feel this is because people are scared of it being true. There are plenty theories like the String Theory that talk about everyone being connected to each other and the earth and that one day we will be able to physically "see" these connections. When this happens supposedly the people who can't fathom this possibility (the coincidence crowd) will freak out and die (I guess by heart-attack, suicide or something) leaving just the "in-tune" to appreciate the new experience. I feel that a lot of people are against the possibility because it opens up the door to shared thought. Which like some posters here mentioned could be a great advantage to humanity, such as in hunting situations where you don't have to signal or talk to convey the position of yourself or prey to others in your pack. Even bigger than that I feel that the productivity level of people would be greatly enhanced. Say there was no more need for numerous BS office e-mails because you could convey an idea to a coworker mentally. Now here is where the understandable fear comes into play. How do you control this thought sharing process? How do I know I wont convey personal thoughts to others? Or have someone read my mind when I don't want them to, mental hacking lets say. Well my opinion in a perfect world there shouldn't be any negative thought. Hatred, prejudice or jealously that would provoke negative thought. There is such a protection of privacy and personal space in this society based on fear. Fear of people knowing the true you maybe due to fear of being ridiculed for it. If the constraints of society were lifted and the ability to love each other equally was possible, people would be wise enough to look past or ignore the 'faults' of another person and instead teach them a way to overcome or adapt to this 'fault' by ways of experience. Reach one, teach one. Most like to hold onto their knowledge as an advantage over others. Everyone striving to become successful and rich to be able to enjoy life fully. If we all could teach each other what we knew the evolution of things could increase rapidly but who would give all their knowledge away without some kind of compensation, especially financial. Well you would be compensated, by others who hold knowledge you don't. But then again WTF do I know?
Next time wrap your text between and , or select Plain Old Text.
Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers
Oh, so this is a requirement now?
OK, so what's the design for an experiment showing a single cell evolving into all life on Earth?
I'll wait
To take the above example, where twins got the same birthday cards, the explanation could simply be that the givers arrived at the same choice which was the result of unconscious responses to patterns too complex or subtle to be detected consciously.
Applying this idea to more general ESP/psychic stuff, I suspect that a large part of the intuitions and insights we get are unconscious responses to stimuli in our environment. Everyone has experienced the sorts of coincidences that defy explanation, such as suddenly having an old song pop into your head for the first time in 10 years and then hearing it an hour later on the radio.
Does this mean you're psychic? No. The explanation may be quite ordinary: information travels rapidly through our physical environment and leaves imprints on the patterns all around us. For simple and obvious patterns, such as for example such as hearing a car horn honk and garbage cans falling over in the distance, and then seeing a cat with a puffed up tail racing by, our brains have no trouble modeling the patterns of the environment in our minds and deducing from the available data what actually took place in reality.
But as the patterns become more complex, more subtle, and as effects diffuse in time and space away from their causes, more and more noise creeps into the chaotic system and our conscious minds have a harder and harder time modeling what's going on and drawing any accurate conclusions. But we should not allow ourselves to presume that it is impossible to perform such modeling and extract meaningful information from the extremely complex environment around us in ways well beyond our ordinary human capacities - even just using normal sensory means: audio, visual, olafactory, temperature, and tactile information.
Mammalian intelligence has evolved over millennia to produce creatures with varying degrees world-modeling and pattern recognition capability. One could argue that humans are the most intelligent of all mammals in many respects. But it is egotistical hubris to think we have reached the limit of what is possible. A vastly more intelligent being would be able to observe the environment and reach conclusions that would appear to us to be totally indistinguishable from being psychic, just as from a dog's perspective the human capacity for anticipation must seem magical. Indeed, anticipation is perhaps the most singularly defining quality of human intelligence.
My suspicion is that we all here and there get unconscious glimmers, via our intuitions and gut-feelings, of what it would be like to be much more intelligent than we actually are. I think that probably goes a long way towards explaining our everyday experiences of ESP and telepathy.
A-Bomb
I have been on several 'ghost hunts' for a show I was editing. I witnessed first hand communication with a being. It was a very bizarre but real experience I shared with several other people. We all were amazed and didn't have any way of explaining it, it just happened. We documented it and have shown it to a bunch of our friends and family. It is always interesting to see their reactions and explanations for what they see. Most feel their is some sort of cheating involved. Now I spent a week with this Paranormal Specialist "Patty Starr", going on numerous hunts for this show. Now she is a very dedicated person and very adamant about achieving natural experiences. She is very against trying to plant or fake a paranormal activity. This communication took place the first day. We had no more experiences for three days. Now if you were a selfish person like a fortune teller, you would be looking for every chance to make something happen. Patty though was just as satisfied with receiving no results as achieving them. She even would battle abnormal activity on some of the video and pictures we took claiming it was dust or a bug flying because she knew what the actual paranormal instances look like and the properties they have. Being that I experienced several paranormal situations with her I fully believe in the concept. It is hard to explain to people but I can usually counter the people who look for instances of cheating or foul play in the footage we produced. For those who have never seen this first hand it is hard to process it I was totally skeptical at first. if you would like to see the episode we produced you can check it out at: http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids. individual&videoID=816078312&n=2 - On Myspace (please use this link to not eat up my bandwidth)
or
http://www.mrsorensen.com/ (under editor/under videos, hit next, it's the second video)
I see no real advantage whatsoever in the proposed Manchester telepathy protocol -- except for the woo-woo fringe, who would enjoy two angles: first, as already demonstrated, it would attract much media attention: "Real science, with complicated computer involvement, is now being used!", and second, it provides the fuzzy "interpretation" variable that is so adored by scientists seeking continued funding: "Results were only suggestive, but obviously more funding is called for." Testing for telepathy ability is a straightforward, logical, simple, matter. It doesn't require the bells-and-whistles that the Manchester protocol would provide. It's always the same story: make a simple process into a complex task, and to the layman it looks more like science...
The stigma of "unnatural" knowledge has been actively pushed out of mainstream civilizations for the past thousand years or so. But some civilizations of old (think of Greece and the Oracle at Delphi), would have honored such telepaths (if a telepath ever existed). If telepathic ability has any genetic roots, it therefore seems likely that natural selection has exterminated (or has dramatically reduced) true telepathic ability throughout the world.
Most societies have ostracized people who have "unnatural" knowledge. As such, any telepaths that survive to today most likely keep a low profile or discount their gift as luck, good insight, or ignore it all together. In addition any telepathic ability that exists in today's world is probably weak or negligible at best due to the inherent natural selection that has occurred over the past few centuries.
So while I find it credible that telepathic ability could exist in a human (and would most likely have a genetic component), I find it unlikely that few (if any) individuals today would posess such an ability. If a scientist were to try to hunt down true telepathic ability, he or she would need to find a civilization or culture that:
A. Has existed for the past 1000 years or so *AND*
B. Has defied human nature by embracing people who display unnatural knowledge instead of ostracizing them
Failing to meet those conditions, you're stuck deriving tests for a multitude of individuals who (in all probability) have little or no telepathic ability due to genetic natural selection over the past few centuries. If telepathic ability ever did exist and currently does not, short of breeding individuals based on trace hints of telepathic ability, the only other way to find a true telepath would be to stumble upon a person who is the descendent of a long history of people who have kept quiet or ignorant about their ability. Considering how unlikely this last scenario is (from a scientific perspective) I'd give any study actively attempting to discover telepathic ability the same odds as hitting a bullseye while blindfolded, a mile away from the target, and pointed in the wrong direction.
Some time ago in the 70s the CIA ran a program to test ESP and related parapychology
and it's usefulness in the intellegence field.
I believe the tested both telekinesis and remote viewing, under great scruitiny.
I don't know what they concluded for telekinesis but their remote viewing experiements
they came to the conclusion that it was a real and somewhat provable phenomenon but could not be used
for intellegence purposes as it was not always accurate enough and there was too much wrong info
amongst the accurate info.
Shortly after, the project was dropped.
Read this report for more info.
Report
or search for:
'Parapsychology in Intelligence: A Personal Review and Conclusions'
On a related note, I did an experiment with 'mind reading' over the internet,
where I had a webpage which asked people to look at a picture in the bottom right
and then think of a number between 0 and 9 and enter it into a text field in the
top left of the page.
The webpage had already predicted the number they would enter before they submitted it.
The results were that over 50% of the time, the number was predicted correctly.
Which is far far better than the ~10% one would get if guessing.
Of course, what the page didn't mention was that in the middle, between
the text box and the picture were large numbers of the predicted number in a very light
grey color that was nearly impossible to see against the white background without
looking very closely.
So mind reading... not quite... but quite an interesting subliminal suggestion experiment.
I forgot to mention: Should the Manchester group move ahead with this hare-brained idea, conjurors from all over the world will descend on them to use the multitude of possible methods for defeating their security. Merely searching a participant is not enough. There is no easily-available means for assuring that signals cannot be exchanged -- just as in the classic picture of telepathy, "thoughts" can be "shared." This is an old and tested conjurors' scenario...
From an evolutionary perspective, telepathy is a strong survival trait. Since we don't see it in the gene pool, it's unlikely that it's even possible.
Hmm, there was a time (think dinosaurs) when humanity was not seen in the worldwide gene pool. Does that mean humanity is unlikely to be possible?
Invariably if I'm in a public place, there will be someone I find attractive and I will think "hey now". I've never had someone come up and slap me for thinking rude thoughts, so at the very least, women I find attractive, as a rule, do not have telepathy.
You are assuming that because these women don't react to your dirty thoughts that means they are not aware of them. Give me a break. Women don't need to be telepathic to be aware of our dirty thoughts. One leer says it all.
The same thing happened during the discussion about Patrick Volkerding when he was dying. Anybody suggesting that he maybe try something other than just going to a doctor AGAIN (like changing his diet, detoxifying his system, maybe proactively using his consciousness to affect his health) was flamed out the wazoo. I suggested doing a juice fast, and people told me I was stupid, and proceeded to point out why using fallacious arguments.
First off, I respect James Randi, whose ethical stand is that people not be taken advantage of by charlatans, of which there are many. There are many charlatans in the medical field, legal field, tech field, etc. As a computer repair guy, I run into clients all the time who were told stuff like a stock LGA775 heatsink/fan is attached to the motherboard and thus will cost $400 to replace. Then they never see the guy again.
The problem with James Randi's approach is that the domain of the spirit and of spiritual practice requires a modicum of faith. That's why any method for accessing spiritual power (Christianity, Buddhism, Qi Gong) doesn't try and prove anything. They just provide a working model for the spiritual world so you can try it on, and see if you can access spiritual power using that method. Like a seminar for speaking more effectively, not everyone is as receptive to each method. Seriously, though, the problem with scrutinizing a faith-based system is that a faith-based system requires faith. I know this sounds like a cop-out, but it's true.
If you have faith, it works. If you don't have faith, it won't work. Inside quantum physics, it has been proven that the observer's desires and expectations change the outcome on a subatomic level. Thus it is in reality, and you would all be better served to put that single principle to work in your life, call it God, or call it Cthulhu.
By the way, telepathy exists. Conscious manifestation exists. And go ahead and argue with me till you're blue in the face about God, telepathy, and manifestation, it just proves that you have little faith in your own viewpoint.
Please stop stalking me, bro.
...spend a bunch of tax dollars finding out when Infinium Labs is going to release their Phantom. At this point that would be proof positive of the paranormal.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
Can you imagine what your life would be like if you did prove you have
psychic powers?
Never mind the media attention; governments suddenly will be *very* interested in you.
The last thing you'd do is give yourself away.
You're not going to find the real thing with any of these tests.
That's also why no information transfer takes place. You've got the two particles separated... Al measures his, and finds it's down. He now knows Bob's is up... but until either he phones Bob, or Bob measures his particle, Bob doesn't know.
Even if you made a more complicated scenario... Your battle fleet has a message particle entangled with one at HQ, and they know that if it has spin up, it means "attack" and spin down means "retreat". But when does the battle fleet check their particle? If they do it before HQ has forced theirs one way or the other, then the fleet has ruined the entanglement. The only way they can know when to check it is when they receive a radio message from HQ, telling them to check... in which case, the communication is still limited by the speed of that radio message.
Just having a wife is paranormal.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
I would guess that many skeptics of psychic phenomena would also argue that George W. Bush is an intelligent life form, despite all evidence to the contrary. If they're wrong on that, how can they be right on anything?
One of the fundamentals of the quantum theory, Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, is that you can't understand it any better than we do, because there's no way to tell -- there's a limit to the resolution to which we can measure fundamental particles. I find the fact that you can make any predictions based on that (statistical ones, yes, but predictions that work) pure genius.
So yes, we don't understand light "completely" as you define "completely"; but we do understand light as completely as is possible given the constraints we currently have. (like having nothing smaller/lighter than electrons to bounce off of things to see where they are...)
And don't forget that most of the quantities you deal with on a regular basis (i.e strength, hardness, concentration, and temperature of materials) are "statistical values"; they're really averages of a very complicated mix of simple properties. Thats why engineers have to do things like "overengineer" -- because there's a measurable probability that a bolt isn't as strong as it's supposed to be, even though it was heated and cooled to the same temperature, etc. as all the others.
- "History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men" -- Blue Oyster Cult, 'Godzilla'
Most people don't like having their phone calls monitored by the government. Could you imagine the impact of having telepaths among us? No one would want a telepath around. I doubt they would live long, or they'd be exploited by the government. If you have telepathic abilities, keep your mouth shut (you don't need it anyway).
From a practical standpoint, telepathy probably only works at close distances, like hearing and vision. It's hard enough picking out a conversation in a crowded room full of talking people. Could you imagine what it would be like to hear the thoughts of everyone on earth? Since we already have external means of communication at close distance (5 senses), what is the benefit of having one more? I doubt that telepathy exists, but if it did exist, but only at close distances, then the internet experiment is doomed to failure.
Are you suggesting:
a) telepathic ability so pronounced as to provide "unnatural knowledge" may spontaneously appear in a population, and,
b) people are distrustful and tend to apply selection pressure by killing people that don't think like themselves?
If so, I think you're trying to bridge the grand canyon with dental floss.
If that's the case, why do we have so many revered geniouses throughout the history of mankind, and zero revered telepaths? I think you're theory is bogus because if it were correct, we would have exterminated ourselves into a beige collective of mindless drones with no original thoughts. Oh, wait...
https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
I highly doubt, if there is telepathic ability in people, that it would exist to the degree that you see in Hollywood movies (or would even come close). The people who have it would first need to realize that they have the ability, and then they'd have to hone it. (Tiger Woods would have been just another schmuck if he had never picked up a golf club.) If it does exist, it most likely exists only in the subconscious level.
I'm merely exploring the feasibility of the ability if it were to exist. Basically, I don't know whether it exists. But if it were to exist (and a science were to be applied to it) I was merely trying to outline where to look first. Yes and No. People are inherently distrustful of strangers or people identified as "not one of us". It's one of the driving forces behind wars (the other more powerful force would be ambition). It has consistently been used throughout history to manipulate populaces to one side or another.
However, selection pressure need not be equated to homicide. Natural selection also has a more passive method, offspring. People who are deemed to be "outsiders" have a much more difficult time finding mates. There are quite a few examples in the animal kingdom. Antisocial behavior is rarely rewarded.
Again, I'm not passing judgement on whether the ability actually exists, but it's far less constructive to say "it doesn't" and leave the conversation there. We have no evidence to support or irrefutably discredit the idea at present.
"Even if you made a more complicated scenario... Your battle fleet has a message particle entangled with one at HQ, and they know that if it has spin up, it means "attack" and spin down means "retreat". But when does the battle fleet check their particle? If they do it before HQ has forced theirs one way or the other, then the fleet has ruined the entanglement. The only way they can know when to check it is when they receive a radio message from HQ, telling them to check... in which case, the communication is still limited by the speed of that radio message."
Alternative:
fleet
1) send out a tangled particle with the fleet
2) preinstruct them to scan at a given time
3) results of scan determine whether to attach or return
base
1) keep partner of tangled particle
2) force spin of base particle up or down prior to scan time by the fleet
What is wrong with the above sequence?
science is a religion
While fighting my way out of a cult, I read many books on cults and how they work, but perhaps the most influentual work I read was on parapsychology, a subject in which I had only a minor interest. The book was Susan Blackmore's "In Search of the Light: The Adventures of a Parapsychologist" where she starts out believing in many things, and like so many studying parapsychology, believed that hard evidence was "just around the corner," waiting to be found. Perhaps her biggest downfall was her own honesty and scientific rigor, something her colleagues didn't seem to have. All her psi experiments were well designed, but failed to find anything. When she investigated others' experiments which appeared to be giving positive results, she found faults in their methods. After being corrected, the experiments no longer gave positive results. She was labeled "psi negative" because of this.
. html
I never heard of so many people strongly believing in something, and having strong incentives to show it exists (would not the person who rigorously demonstrates PSI be justifiably rich and famous?), and find no evidence whatsoever, yet after years CONTINUE TO BELIEVE it exists! By the end of the book the author did not claim to no longer believe, but was certainly disillusioned, and just said "I don't know."
Years after having written the book, she finally did "give up" searching for PSI:
http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/journalism/NS2000
I was in a group where I had believed things with no evidence other than everyone around me also believed them and said they were true. Looking back, I thought I had independently come to the same conclusions as everyone else in the group! It was my own investigations outside the group and reading "outside material" that led me out. They told me not to quit a minute before the miracle happens, and that being happy, joyous and free was "just around the corner" if I kept doing what they told me. Despite the "spiritual not religious" claim, it was indeed a religious experience, and it is as much a religion as is fundamentalist Christianity.
Parapsychology is perhaps where religion and science come closest to overlapping, but like a Venn diagram showing two non-touching circles, there is no overlap. But at least parapsychologists try. "Creation scientists" do not do any actual science that I've heard of in attempts to show that their beliefs are true.
There is more evidence for cold fusion (the fusing of atoms at moderate temperature, not the programming system) than for ESP, and there's virtually NO evidence for cold fusion.
Tag lost or not installed.