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

Aye, but they are talking about commercial devices in that article for measuring surface profiles... have you seen the length of Radins device? I guess it's internal cavity is able to resonate strongly at it's fundamental frequency, and upwards... not qualified to hazzard a guess what Hz those might be... and remember this device has been put into a shielded metal room that will really resonate.

I get what you're trying to say, but this starts to feel stretched.
Meditators here were  asked to focus on changing the behavior of particles, not on singing mantras. You either do one or the other.

this got my PC speakers, everything on my desk, and my feet on the floor vibrating madly... "...richly harmonic..." ? heh heh

Maybe because it goes through an amplifier and speakers rest on the desk?

That's the point of running different experiments, but doing a completely different sort of experiment via the internet doesn't me you can rule out vibration (air pressure) as a factor responsible for the results in these other experiments. If you want to rule vibration out of those experiments you need to design them in such a way that vibration from air pressure can be excluded. That is going to mean you need to do some measurements of air pressure, resonance, and reinforcement etc.

Why would there be a difference in vibration for actual vs control sessions in the online experiments? As in why would the air pressure be different considering none of the subjects in the online experiments were present in the same room?

You theory would have more credence if these online experiments were not positive and significant, but they were. I think it's clear air pressure/vibration isn't a factor at this point, though in this independent replication he could have been more stringent, it doesn't seem to make a difference in previous experiments, so why would it in this one?

Well Radin and the other guy don't apparently know it... because not only don't they measure for this type of vibration, they deliberately introduce 'richly harmonic' sounds into the room where the device is located.

Dean are you still on the forum? Can you comment?

Dean are you still on the forum? Can you comment?

The best comment is that the online experiments that had the participants at a distance found the same result as the ones Max is describing (I don't think that accurately though). If the sound/vibration was responsible for the effect then the online experiments wouldn't have had a positive result.

Oh, I see, you haven't read one of Radin's experiments... You don't know about the Omm chant and richly harmonic sounds played through speakers and headphones which feeds back through the device, so that it gets louder during concentration periods...

Hold on, Radin specifically said it was played through noise cancelling headphones, not through speakers. I really feel you're being misleading now (and not explaining why the online experiments also got positive results without anything being played through headphones or speakers).

Why is that one relevant? He said that Guerrer used the setup from those that used headphones.

One of the reasons I hardly ever respond to critics in online forms is that it's not possible in this format to explain experimental results, analyses, historical context, etc., in sufficient detail to satisfy everyone. There is always a "Max" out there. So I prefer to put my time into writing articles for peer-reviewed professional journals and in encouraging other qualified scientists to try to replicate our work. 

That said, I'm glad that forums like this exist. These topics are interesting and important, but not everyone is interested in or adept in understanding all of the technical details. That's why I write popular books, and even then I get criticisms that they are still too technical. There's no pleasing everyone.

As for the Guerrer replication, the important point is that it was a completely independent study. I saw his preprint at the same time as everyone else and I wasn't involved in any aspect of his work. He did visit our lab early on to learn in detail how we conducted our experiments, which is sound practice for anyone interested in conducting a replication. By visiting another researcher's lab you quickly gain a sense about the competence of the investigators, you can examine the equipment and testing environment first-hand, and through all that you can decide if the reported results are credible enough to go to the considerable effort of conducting a replication. We spent time discussing many alternative explanations for what we had observed, including systematic fluctuations in sound and building vibrations, variations in ambient temperature due to movements of the human body, subtle changes in magnetic and electromagnetic fields, etc.  

No one experiment is ever going to be perfect, but when you start to see converging independent replications (and within psi research there are many), that's a good sign.

- Dean Radin

Dean Radin have you seen this blog?

http://americanloons.blogspot.co.uk/2014...radin.html

Or this article:

http://www.csicop.org/si/show/when_big_e...upernormal

How do you respond to such criticisms about your research?