Would proof of Psi substantially change Science?

I didn't knew old members where immune to any form and type of critique, except when they disagree about psi. My mistake.

Honestly, I didn't really care. Though I did think a paper called Radical Nonlocality was relevant to the question of information transfer?
 
I started an NDE reference thread on the other forum, which lists all the prospective studies I could find. I linked to full text wherever possible, so you can at least read about the proportion of patients who eventually filled the requirements for NDE.

http://forum.mind-energy.net/forum/...ms/skeptiko-podcast/5945-nde-reference-thread

Unfortunately, they don't have the actual patient interviews, for obvious space reasons. The best resource for this is Penny's book, which isn't easily available, unless you have lots of money. I have a copy, as well as MaxB.

Linda

If you live in the US, most public (and university?) libraries have an inter-library loan service, which is how I got Penny's book to read. You can literally get almost any book or published scientific paper through this service. Sometimes there is a small fee. At my library it is 50 cents.
 
If you live in the US, most public (and university?) libraries have an inter-library loan service, which is how I got Penny's book to read. You can literally get almost any book or published scientific paper through this service. Sometimes there is a small fee. At my library it is 50 cents.
Yes, that's my recommendation as well. It just takes longer than clicking on a link.

Linda
 
I started an NDE reference thread on the other forum, which lists all the prospective studies I could find. I linked to full text wherever possible, so you can at least read about the proportion of patients who eventually filled the requirements for NDE.

http://forum.mind-energy.net/forum/...ms/skeptiko-podcast/5945-nde-reference-thread
http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/con...A236?sid=c53ff220-a12c-4fe9-97b1-1746a05474af

Unfortunately, they don't have the actual patient interviews, for obvious space reasons. The best resource for this is Penny's book, which isn't easily available, unless you have lots of money. I have a copy, as well as MaxB.

Linda
Thanks for the links, I'll check them. However, I'm still a bit curious about Penny's book, ¿can you give one or two brief examples of non-NDE dreams she reported?
 
¿What properties are you talking about here? Quantum entanglement seems to be the only effect at distance that can happen without a mediating force, at least that I know about. All the other are forces well established within the Standard Model and the current model preclude any force that could accomodate ESP.
Quantum entanglement can't transmit information - as I expect you know. I don't know who you were quoting, but I think the fact that unmodified quantum entanglement can't transmit information is pretty well known around here.

David
 
I didn't knew old members where immune to any form and type of critique, except when they disagree about psi. My mistake.
You can criticise who you like here, but it helps to make the criticism specific. Criticising someone for posting too many links doesn't seem very sensible. I mean, a link only takes one line, and people can follow it or ignore it as they see fit.

David
 
I think the forum serves as more than just a collection of opinions. It is also a repository for related information. The great thing about a community is that each member adds something unique. Aside from some great commentary, Sciborg adds a boatload of relevant links. Just ignore them if you don't like them. Or use the functionality of the ignore feature of the forum software.

We generally only criticize the skeptics here. Open season on Malf, FLS, Paul or Steve001, but picking on Sciborg is not cool.
We'll all keep that in mind.
 
Quantum entanglement can't transmit information - as I expect you know. I don't know who you were quoting, but I think the fact that unmodified quantum entanglement can't transmit information is pretty well known around here.

David

Thats why I'm asking Suzumiya to explain exactly what she is proposing here. If it's some sort of novel thing in physics, then it's perfectly possible, but it would also mean that the current mainstream physics scientific model cannot account for psi.
 
Honestly, I didn't really care. Though I did think a paper called Radical Nonlocality was relevant to the question of information transfer?

Well, it is, but the fact that it's "radical" already seem to imply strongly that it will be a change in physics, and hence, that current physics can't explain psi, which was my contention.
 
If you live in the US, most public (and university?) libraries have an inter-library loan service, which is how I got Penny's book to read. You can literally get almost any book or published scientific paper through this service. Sometimes there is a small fee. At my library it is 50 cents.

Linda is Canadian. :D
 
Thats why I'm asking Suzumiya to explain exactly what she is proposing here. If it's some sort of novel thing in physics, then it's perfectly possible, but it would also mean that the current mainstream physics scientific model cannot account for psi.
I think the fact that particles are entangled, and yet the correlation is such that it can only be detected after the two sets of records are brought together, is quite extraordinary. It certainly hints to me that there is unfinished business here - because some influence travels faster than light in these experiments.

I think relative newcomers, such as yourself, can make the mistake of assuming that people interested in ψ, aren't much interested in science and use its terminology loosely. However, a lot of people here are interested in exactly what is the relationship between science and ψ.

I would start from the assumption that if people talk about passing information via entanglement, they are assuming some sort of extension to QM. Standard QM has only really been tested for small numbers of particles - heck anything beyond the hydrogen atom requires approximations! It seems to me, entirely possible that the rules change when larger numbers of particles are entangled - who knows. I don't know how many entangled pairs, those experiments can handle per second, but it it is high enough, it might be interesting to try to transmit some music that way, and see if the human ear could detect anything in the signal at the other end!

David
 
¿What properties are you talking about here? Quantum entanglement seems to be the only effect at distance that can happen without a mediating force, at least that I know about. All the other are forces well established within the Standard Model and the current model preclude any force that could accomodate ESP.

Ultra low frecuency waves, holographic traits.
 
Quantum entanglement can't transmit information - as I expect you know. I don't know who you were quoting, but I think the fact that unmodified quantum entanglement can't transmit information is pretty well known around here.

If I recall, the objections to that remain in the researchers trading notes to see that they did indeed result with opposite spins at the requisite times. I'm not aware of any experiments that, perhaps, use a synchronized atomic clock or similar mechanism to attempt a data transfer without cross-checking every sample against a notebook. They were trying to study that an entanglement-like effect did happen, they weren't actively trying to transmit data over it. Then a lot of people started saying you can't transmit data, even though I'm not sure anyone has seriously tried to yet.
 
The reason information can't be used for faster than light communication (btw, that's what non-local means) is once a measurement is made on an entangled system the entanglement is destroyed permanently. Having a bunch of particles entangled would not solve the problem.
 
If I recall, the objections to that remain in the researchers trading notes to see that they did indeed result with opposite spins at the requisite times. I'm not aware of any experiments that, perhaps, use a synchronized atomic clock or similar mechanism to attempt a data transfer without cross-checking every sample against a notebook. They were trying to study that an entanglement-like effect did happen, they weren't actively trying to transmit data over it. Then a lot of people started saying you can't transmit data, even though I'm not sure anyone has seriously tried to yet.
I am not completely sure how a transmitting experiment would work. Let's think in terms of entangled electrons with opposite spins. It A and B measure using the same axis (say Z), then the answers should be opposite (ignoring experimental imperfections), but if A and B measure using different axes, the answers would be random. Maybe some attempt at transmission using oblique axes would help.

David
 
Back
Top