6.37 sigma replication of Dean Radin's double slit consciousness experiments

334 Replies, 49661 Views

(2017-09-03, 03:49 PM)Roberta Wrote: First of all you said you only skim read the paper so I'm now skeptical of your synopsis, and I think it's highly premature to say 'therefore sound caused these changes' - especially as several experiments with different designs found highly significant results beforehand. 

However we all want to get to the truth, how would you feel about contacting the author of the paper with your criticisms and letting us (with his permission) see his response?

Now we're talking..  Idea
(2017-09-03, 12:52 PM)Max_B Wrote: I didn't need to read it in detail to find the 'thing' that had not been controlled for, Radin has done it in all his experiments (that I have read). This guy obviously does the same.

If experimenters could affect their results in the way that Radin claims, different QM experiments, from different experimenters around the world wouldn't turn out the same, so we know it's bunkum anyway.

These are just bad experiments which are not properly controlled, are they deliberate, not sure, but if you look at ION's business model one has to raise the possibility.

You are effectively accusing Radin and IONs of fraud now - you do realise that right? It's pretty funny when people think there's money in Parapsychology. Anyway it's easy to say these things behind the anonyminity of the internet. Why not contact Radin with your concerns? Easy to throw mud like this when the person can't respond.
[-] The following 3 users Like Roberta's post:
  • tim, jkmac, Ninshub
I've been trying to understand the statistical analysis technique, which is pretty complicated. I'm giving up for the time being. But it seems that in the control sessions, where no participant was present, there were alternate "intention" and "relax" conditions, and the non-significant p value mentioned in the abstract reflects the difference between these. I suppose this means that the visual feedback produced by an LED operated during the control "intention" condition, but I'm not clear whether they also had a set of headphones sitting there producing the audible feedback. (If they did, that would apparently show that the observed effect wasn't an acoustic effect due to the feedback, as Max suggested.)
[-] The following 1 user Likes Guest's post:
  • Roberta
This post has been deleted.
This post has been deleted.
(2017-09-03, 04:35 PM)Max_B Wrote: I know you don't like my ideas, but these developments are coming anyway, whether you like them or not... it's inevitable. It would be very strange for me to be able to gather so much research which all points in the same direction...

If you look at recent ideas from a respected quantum physicists like Matt Fisher...

https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-new-spi...-20161102/

Well respected mainstream scientists like Frank Prato...  

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Vla...eories.pdf

Intuative and creative scientists like Luca Turin...

https://vimeo.com/114917327

Danny Adams from Tufts who stumbled across the apparent significance of EM effects on development, that informs on Matt Fischer's ideas...

http://ase.tufts.edu/biology/faculty/adams/index.asp

Adrian Thompson's stunning work on evolvable hardware... and the strange disconnected circuits that made the hardware work.

http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~toby/writing/PCW/evolware.htm

[Adrian has totally disappeared from public view for many years now, but we can guess that work has not stopped, I think he may potentially be the Alan Turing of our age.]

the list goes on and on... these ideas are not going away, they are getting stronger...

Yes, I've had a quick look at those links, Max (one of them doesn't work). You seem to have an awful lot of hope invested in these EM field theories. Theories are all they are, unfortunately especially the one by Fisher who believes he's discovered something about phosphorous molecules that show that the brain has quantum effects.

I'm not qualified to comment on that other than to say that the brain certainly is a computer but the mind or our consciousness, certainly isn't. I feel quite happy to state that no one will ever be able to understand the mechanism or the construct of consciousness and that's what we're dealing with when we address near death experiences.

The sense of self "relocates" away from the body. That sense of self is not solely composed of strings of information  (EM or whatever), Information is not consciousness. We can be conscious without any information.

And Fisher's theory receives criticism  

Even Hore and Olaya-Castro are skeptical of the latter, particularly Fisher’s rough estimate that the coherence could last a day or more. “I think it’s very unlikely, to be honest,” Olaya-Castro said. “The longest time scale relevant for the biochemical activity that’s happening here is the scale of seconds, and that’s too long.” (Neurons can store information for microseconds.) Hore calls the prospect “remote,” pegging the limit at one second at best. “That doesn’t invalidate the whole idea, but I think he would need a different molecule to get long coherence times,” he said. “I don’t think the Posner molecule is it. But I’m looking forward to hearing how it goes.”
(This post was last modified: 2017-09-03, 05:33 PM by tim. Edit Reason: typo )
[-] The following 2 users Like tim's post:
  • Doug, Ninshub
Maybe one of the admins can extend an invitation to Radin/Guerrer or both to formally join the forum? I'm sure that they would only peek every once in a while (like Bernardo), but it could be illuminating to see where they are coming from.

RE Influencing outcomes: I once again mention the quantum erasers, especially the delayed choice variant. It is also the most parsimonious interpretation of the basic double slit, but people freaked out and created a bunch of rubbish to delay the process by several decades... Which is why we are still debunking hidden variable theories and the such.
"Deep into that darkness peering, long I stood there, wondering, fearing, doubting, dreaming dreams no mortal ever dared to dream before..."
[-] The following 3 users Like E. Flowers's post:
  • tim, Typoz, Roberta
This post has been deleted.
(2017-09-03, 07:13 PM)E. Flowers Wrote: Maybe one of the admins can extend an invitation to Radin/Guerrer or both to formally join the forum? I'm sure that they would only peek every once in a while (like Bernardo), but it could be illuminating to see where they are coming from.

Yes, I think that's a good idea. I had been thinking I might contact Guerrer myself when I'd had a few more days to digest the paper, to ask one or two questions and to suggest he might like to look at the forum.
[-] The following 2 users Like Guest's post:
  • Roberta, E. Flowers
This is Guerrer's FB account... Apparently he worked at CERN?
https://facebook.com/guerrer?fref=nf&ref=content_filter

And, of course, Radin's:
https://facebook.com/profile.php?id=1040...ent_filter
"Deep into that darkness peering, long I stood there, wondering, fearing, doubting, dreaming dreams no mortal ever dared to dream before..."
[-] The following 3 users Like E. Flowers's post:
  • laborde, Typoz, Roberta

  • View a Printable Version
Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)