Parapsychology is incompatible with physics

[Magical Realist]

Interestingly, only one of those examples is less than 100 years old.

Anyway, yes if a new scientific result is found that doesn't fit existing theory, then the theory needs to change. But since the positive results of PSI research are typically not from scientific tests, no such confirmed/scientific results exist. So the the theories are not being challenged by PSI woo-wooism.

No. Here's the conclusion of the first study:

You'll find that is about the best that can be said about PSI research: at its best, it is lots and lots of nothing.

I gave a list of about a hundred studies in PSI. I gave additional metaanalysises of hundreds of more studies. You find one that was inconclusive and dismiss all the rest as the same. Clearly you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Magical Realist]

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated.

It's this persistent fallacy in materialism and physicalism of some sort of irreducible substantial substrate underlying all reality. The myth of the irreducible physical particle. The blind and uncritical acceptance of physicality itself, without even seeking to define it, as an absolute monism. In fact science has only increasingly shown reality to be based on relationships and processes--on abstract principles and laws and constants and variables and mathematical equations. Substance has dissolved into a ghostworld of sheer forms and patterns that only create the illusion of solidity and impermeability and discreteness. Naive realism says the chair is hard and there and ontically irreducible. Science says the chair is a diaphanous nebula of forces and charges and probabilities extending thru 4D spacetime. Really now, how far a stretch is THAT from supernaturalism?

 

[Russ_Watters]

I gave a list of about a hundred studies in PSI. I gave additional metaanalysises of hundreds of more studies. You find one that was inconclusive...

Not just one, the first one. And don't forget, this was your claim:
"Scientific studies supporting the existence of PSI:"
By which, you meant all of them support the existence of PSI. But right off the bat, you're 0 for 1.

...and dismiss all the rest as the same...

That one example falsifies your claim. So would you like to amend your claim to say what fraction of those studies are scientific and actually support PSI? Or how about an easier task: find one study in that list that is both scientific and supports the existence of PSI.

Clearly you have no idea what you are talking about.

Well, it is possible that one of us does and one of us doesn't. So you tell me: did you know your claim was false when you made it? Were you lying or did you just not know what you were talking about?

 

[Magical Realist]

Not just one, the first one. And don't forget, this was your claim:
"Scientific studies supporting the existence of PSI:"
By which, you meant all of them support the existence of PSI. But right off the bat, you're 0 for 1.

That one example falsifies your claim. So would you like to amend your claim to say what fraction of those studies are scientific and actually support PSI? Or how about an easier task: find one study in that list that is both scientific and supports the existence of PSI.

Well, it is possible that one of us does and one of us doesn't. So you tell me: did you know your claim was false when you made it? Were you lying or did you just not know what you were talking about?

I see. So you're trolling me again. Move on before I report you again troll..

 

[Russ_Watters]

I see. So you're trolling me again. Move on before I report you again troll..

Go for it, MR. Everyone knows who does the trolling here. You're just attracting attention to your own trolling, increasing the likelihood of your next ban.

 

[Quantum Quack]

Even if we ignore non-existent mechanism. Psi is without evidence or theory.

Wrong, as there is a "mechanism" provided by existing scientific endeavor that you and others simply refuse to accept. There is also sound reason for why evidence of psy phenonema (communication) can not be empirically determined and is not predictable as per the scientific method.

 

[Yazata]

I'm not a believer in parapsychology and think that its claims have a very low probability of being true. Nevertheless...

The phrase 'well-established laws of physics' does suggest several loopholes that they might try to exploit.

'Well-established laws of physics' doesn't exclude the possibility of additional laws of physics that aren't so well-established in 2014, and perhaps even completely unknown to science at the present time. The laws of physics aren't a closed set.

'Well-established laws of physics' are basically universal generalizations based on finite data sets. People thought that all swans are white, until they encountered black swans. The laws of physics aren't deductive necessities and violations of them don't seem to be logical impossibilities.

'Well-established laws of physics' suggests that these are laws that concern the behavior of physical reality. There are those who argue for the existence of other kinds of non-physical realities as well, most prominently so-called 'spiritual' reality. There's Descartes' mind-body dualism and whatnot.

Yes there may be other weak forces that we have not discovered. But you are wrong in the context of parapsychology because there would need to be a strong and long-range force but there is no evidence for one, if it existed it would have been observed by now but it hasn't.

I'm inclined to think that there's a great deal that we haven't yet observed that nevertheless exists. I don't want to interpret the limits of human knowledge as the limits of reality.

As the article below I quote points out "Since the human brain consists of ordinary matter, there is no possibility of explaining the phenomena claimed by parapsychology with the aid of new and unknown forces". Now some parapsychologists like to quote quantum quackery or stuff about quantum physics but that doesn't help because any force at a quantum level is not strong enough to explain the claims of parapsychology.

There is no possible force for paranormal phenomena or parapsychology because they would be too weak.

Why all the interest in the strength of forces? Excluding psychokinesis, the claims made by parapsychology seem to involve information. Assuming that this kind of information transferral really happens (which I don't believe), maybe the 'radio-transmitter' model isn't the right way to think about it. Maybe some other unknown process could be responsible.

There's something odd about discussing the unknown physics of counter-factual possibilities, of what might happen but seemingly doesn't. Yet that would seem to be required when we are talking about what is and isn't possible. All of the unrealized possibilities would have to be excluded. That's difficult when we don't even know what those possibilities are.

But anyway what we do know is that every single psychic or medium has been discovered to be a fraud or failed their test under scientific conditions. So psi has no scientific data and no theory.

OK.

There is no psi.

Maybe not. But 'no scientific data and no theory' are probably better justification for our simply not believing in psi.

 

[Seattle]

Wrong, as there is a "mechanism" provided by existing scientific endeavor that you and others simply refuse to accept.

No, there isn't.

There is also sound reason for why evidence of psy phenonema (communication) can not be empirically determined and is not predictable as per the scientific method.

I agree and that sound reason is that it (psi) doesn't exist.

 

[Magical Realist]

http://www.noetic.org/blog/series-of-experiments-shed-light-on-the-role-of-co/

"..Nobel Laureate physicist Richard Feynman famously said, "[The double-slit experiment] has in it the heart of quantum mechanics. In reality, it contains the only mystery."

Feynman's mystery involves what it means to "observe" or to measure a physical object. When we observe an everyday object, meaning an object that can be adequately described using classical physics, the act of observation does not influence the object's properties. This is not the case when observing a quantum system. Quantum objects are exquisitely reactive to the act of observation; this sensitivity can easily be seen whenever a quantum object is measured. The measurement causes the quantum wave-like behavior to change into particle-like behavior. A controversial interpretation of this effect—that consciousness itself is responsible for "collapsing" the quantum wavefunction—was proposed by mathematician John von Neumann and supported by other prominent physicists. Much has been debated about this "quantum measurement problem" from philosophical and theoretical perspectives; we are taking a more pragmatic approach by explicitly testing von Neumann's idea.

In our latest paper, we report the results of three experiments: two involving double-slit optical systems that people attempted to mentally influence in our lab, and one involving a similar test conducted online. All three experiments showed results consistent with von Neumann's proposal and with our earlier work. We are continuing to explore this mind-matter interaction phenomenon, and we will report the results of those studies in future publications."

 

[Magical Realist]

Why all the interest in the strength of forces? Excluding psychokinesis, the claims made by parapsychology seem to involve information. Assuming that this kind of information transferral really happens (which I don't believe), maybe the 'radio-transmitter' model isn't the right way to think about it. Maybe some other unknown process could be responsible.

I think there is a superposition-collapsing effect produced by the event of awareness that determines what can and will happen. This would explain experiments showing an effect of subjects' minds on random number generators. I don't see the need to posit any sort of force here. It's more like a modification at the statistical level, ranging from weak hardly noticeable effects to strong emotional effects. Indeed, manipulation of a state of equal possibilities wouldn't even contradict physical causality imo. The effect would occur only in situations where there is a high degree of underdetermination or randomness in whatever the outcome will be. And then again the emotional strength of the mental event would be more powerful in weighting one particular outcome over another. Or stronger still for those who have developed this skill.

 

[Seattle]

http://www.noetic.org/blog/series-of-experiments-shed-light-on-the-role-of-co/

"..Nobel Laureate physicist Richard Feynman famously said, "[The double-slit experiment] has in it the heart of quantum mechanics. In reality, it contains the only mystery."

Feynman's mystery involves what it means to "observe" or to measure a physical object. When we observe an everyday object, meaning an object that can be adequately described using classical physics, the act of observation does not influence the object's properties. This is not the case when observing a quantum system. Quantum objects are exquisitely reactive to the act of observation; this sensitivity can easily be seen whenever a quantum object is measured. The measurement causes the quantum wave-like behavior to change into particle-like behavior. A controversial interpretation of this effect—that consciousness itself is responsible for "collapsing" the quantum wavefunction—was proposed by mathematician John von Neumann and supported by other prominent physicists. Much has been debated about this "quantum measurement problem" from philosophical and theoretical perspectives; we are taking a more pragmatic approach by explicitly testing von Neumann's idea.

In our latest paper, we report the results of three experiments: two involving double-slit optical systems that people attempted to mentally influence in our lab, and one involving a similar test conducted online. All three experiments showed results consistent with von Neumann's proposal and with our earlier work. We are continuing to explore this mind-matter interaction phenomenon, and we will report the results of those studies in future publications."

Ridiculous. There is always the attempt, it seems, to somehow tie Feynman or Einstein into conclusions that Feynman or Einstein would never reach.

Consciousness isn't collapsing the waveform.

 

[Seattle]

I think there is a superposition-collapsing effect produced by the event of awareness that determines what can and will happen. This would explain experiments showing an effect of subjects' minds on random number generators. I don't see the need to posit any sort of force here. It's more like a modification at the statistical level, ranging from weak hardly noticeable effects to strong emotional effects. Indeed, manipulation of a state of equal possibilities wouldn't even contradict physical causality imo. The effect would occur only in situations where there is a high degree of underdetermination or randomness in whatever the outcome will be. And then again the emotional strength of the mental event would be more powerful in weighting one particular outcome over another. Or stronger still for those who have developed this skill.

Of course there would have to be a mechanism. Just calling it a "modification at the statistical level" doesn't change anything. There is no "statistical level".

What do you think some people are capable of doing regarding ESP? Can some people read your mind or predict the future?

Can you do those things? Is is just some special people? Are their brains wired differently than ours...maybe like someone with synesthesia?

What exactly is the (your) claim?

Forget someone picking numbers that seem to be slightly greater than random chance. What is it that really fuels your interest in this subject?

 

[Magical Realist]

Of course there would have to be a mechanism. Just calling it a "modification at the statistical level" doesn't change anything. There is no "statistical level".

There is always a statistical level called the wavefunction. As to what causes consciousness to modify it, who knows? It may just be part of the mathematics, as with Von Neumann's and Wigner's interpretation of the measurement problem:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann–Wigner_interpretation

We also have the case of quantum entanglement in which there is an effect with no known mechanism. So there is precedent for acausal effects in nature involving mind/matter interaction.

What do you think some people are capable of doing regarding ESP? Can some people read your mind or predict the future?

We have many experiments confirming remote viewing of scenes being looked at in remote locations. We have experimental and anecdotal evidence of telepathic connections between twins. We have evidence of precognition in picture viewing trials involving erotic images. We have abundant evidence of subjects being able to affect electronic devices with their thoughts. We are just beginning to grasp the various possibilities open to consciousness.

Can you do those things? Is is just some special people? Are their brains wired differently than ours...maybe like someone with synesthesia?

The consensus is that anyone can do this, depending on the situation and the emotional impact of the event involved. But some seem better at it than others. I've had many experiences with synchronicity, the coincidence of words and phrases I'm reading or texting with what is said at the same time on the TV and the radio. It's more than just chance, but I have no explanation for it.

Forget someone picking numbers that seem to be slightly greater than random chance. What is it that really fuels your interest in this subject?

Because it's real and goes on all the time, despite skeptics' attempts to deny it. What other reason do I need?

 

[Seattle]

There is always a statistical level called the wavefunction. As to what causes consciousness to modify it, who knows? It may just be part of the mathematics, as with Von Neumann's and Wigner's interpretation of the measurement problem:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann–Wigner_interpretation

We also have the case of quantum entanglement in which there is an effect with no known mechanism. So there is precedent for acausal effects in nature involving mind/matter interaction.



We have many experiments confirming remote viewing of scenes being looked at in remote locations. We have experimental and anecdotal evidence of telepathic connections between twins. We have evidence of precognition in picture viewing trials involving erotic images. We have abundant evidence of subjects being able to affect electronic devices with their thoughts. We are just beginning to grasp the various possibilities open to consciousness.



The consensus is that anyone can do this, depending on the situation and the emotional impact of the event involved. But some seem better at it than others. I've had many experiences with synchronicity, the coincidence of words and phrases I'm reading or texting with what is said at the same time on the TV and the radio. It's more than just chance, but I have no explanation for it.



Because it's real and goes on all the time, despite skeptics' attempts to deny it. What other reason do I need?

Quantuum Mechanics has to be the most misused subject in the pseudoscience community.

Regarding the "experiments", no, you do not have valid experiments.

What other reasons do you need? You don't need any other reasons apparently.

Not understanding coincidence and probability and wanting ESP to be real accounts for all it it however.

 

[Quantum Quack]

http://www.noetic.org/blog/series-of-experiments-shed-light-on-the-role-of-co/

"..Nobel Laureate physicist Richard Feynman famously said, "[The double-slit experiment] has in it the heart of quantum mechanics. In reality, it contains the only mystery."

Feynman's mystery involves what it means to "observe" or to measure a physical object. When we observe an everyday object, meaning an object that can be adequately described using classical physics, the act of observation does not influence the object's properties. This is not the case when observing a quantum system. Quantum objects are exquisitely reactive to the act of observation; this sensitivity can easily be seen whenever a quantum object is measured. The measurement causes the quantum wave-like behavior to change into particle-like behavior. A controversial interpretation of this effect—that consciousness itself is responsible for "collapsing" the quantum wavefunction—was proposed by mathematician John von Neumann and supported by other prominent physicists. Much has been debated about this "quantum measurement problem" from philosophical and theoretical perspectives; we are taking a more pragmatic approach by explicitly testing von Neumann's idea.

In our latest paper, we report the results of three experiments: two involving double-slit optical systems that people attempted to mentally influence in our lab, and one involving a similar test conducted online. All three experiments showed results consistent with von Neumann's proposal and with our earlier work. We are continuing to explore this mind-matter interaction phenomenon, and we will report the results of those studies in future publications."

edit: was intended as a response to Seattle... my apologies MR!

Why do you think the underlying mechanism for proven Quantum Entanglement pheno is inappropriate as a candidate mechanism for "communication across a distant instantaneously" (no strings attached - spooky action at a distance etc) ?

There is abundant evidence of psi but not of a kind that would be deemed not necessarily positive or useful.

try this:
Underlying (mechanism) logic behind quantum entanglement:

so at
t=delta 0, distance = zero
Extended: all points in 4 dimensional space have zero separating distance when t=delta 0
which then leads to :

Please ignore the text as the image is part of another work. Zero Point theory.

The reason why psi is unpredictable can be explained as the same reason why transfer of information "deliberately" (with effort - energy - time) expands zero dimensions in to 4 dimensions in Quantum Entanglement pheno.

So every time you wish to transfer energy the dimensions expand to 4.
If left alone info transfer across zero distance happens quite innately.

The worlds population of Paranoid Schizophrenics and other "socially disconnected" persons are testimony to what happens when a person becomes aware of our collective psi entanglement. The awareness, due to inherent fear thus paranoia (and a "will to power") then forces the person to apply energy and time to stay connected leading to failure of information transfer as with quantum entanglement thereupon leading to various degrees of societal dysfunctional and individual trauma due mainly to the intense fatigue involved in maintaining any semblance of normal connectivity.

It could be successfully argued quite rationally that evidence for psi is abundantly available of a relational or societal dysfunctional kind.

... a mouth full...yes?

Looking for evidence of connectivity (entanglement) is fraught with problems, as the mere effort applied produces expansion to 4 dimensions, however looking for evidence of dis connectivity is quite easy...

 

[Seattle]

edit: was intended as a response to Seattle... my apologies MR!

Why do you think the underlying mechanism for proven Quantum Entanglement pheno is inappropriate as a candidate mechanism for "communication across a distant instantaneously" (no strings attached - spooky action at a distance etc) ?

Because it's proven as applied to the Quantum world and it's not proven for anything else. It's not understood but the evidence does seem to bear it out.

That's the problem with psi...the evidence isn't there, nothing is proven.

There is abundant evidence of psi but not of a kind that would be deemed not necessarily positive or useful.

"but not of kind that would be deemed not positive or useful"? Two "not's" would be a positive but who said anything about psi having to be positive or negative?

There is just is no evidence for it.

...
It could be successfully argued quite rationally that evidence for psi is abundantly available of a relational or societal dysfunctional kind.

... a mouth full...yes?

Looking for evidence of connectivity (entanglement) is fraught with problems, as the mere effort applied produces expansion to 4 dimensions, however looking for evidence of dis connectivity is quite easy...

This is all just woo woo. You might as well call it "religion" You, in effect, believe in prayers but they aren't always answered and can't be tested but you're sure that is something going on but it's all too mysterious for scientific methods to be used.

Either someone can read minds or predict the future or they can't. If it isn't repeatable it's coincidence. The is something else that psi has in common with religion...the concept of a "miracle".

 

[Quantum Quack]

Because it's proven as applied to the Quantum world and it's not proven for anything else. It's not understood but the evidence does seem to bear it out.

That's the problem with psi...the evidence isn't there, nothing is proven.


"but not of kind that would be deemed not positive or useful"? Two "not's" would be a positive but who said anything about psi having to be positive or negative?

There is just is no evidence for it.



This is all just woo woo. You might as well call it "religion" You, in effect, believe in prayers but they aren't always answered and can't be tested but you're sure that is something going on but it's all too mysterious for scientific methods to be used.

Either someone can read minds or predict the future or they can't. If it isn't repeatable it's coincidence. The is something else that psi has in common with religion...the concept of a "miracle".

Are you familiar with how Quantum entanglement is evidenced according to the scientific method?
There was an excellent thread started by Cpt Bork a while ago uhm Bells theorem I believe it's called. A form of deductive reasoning at it's most refined...IMO
Is evidence of entanglement merely coincidence then? Circumstantial evidence at best perhaps?
Where does entanglement stop and where does it start... is it happening all the time or only when tested for...? etc etc...


The bottom line as I tried to explain is everything works fine until you try to do it deliberately.
"Don't try... do" Yoda said to Luke Sky Walker of Star wars fame.

No such thing as miracles only believing in the science you already have....and quantum entanglement as evidenced is sufficient to help explain a whole host of otherwise inexplicable pheno. IMO

"but not of kind that would be deemed not positive or useful"? Two "not's" would be a positive but who said anything about psi having to be positive or negative?

yeah I stand corrected ...weird grammar ... sorry.. should have read...

"There is abundant evidence of psi, most of which would not be deemed positive or useful."

 

[Quantum Quack]

If it isn't repeatable it's coincidence

Example (limitations of the scientific method):
A fly landed on my shoulder yesterday at exactly 10:31 am. It is impossible for the event to repeat as 10 31 am on that day has passed.
Question:
Did the fly land on my shoulder at 10: 31 am according to the scientific method?

No... so I guess it must have been a miracle or worse, a coincidence...but definitely woo woo...
Come to think of it.... if one thinks in absolute terms, the probability of an event repeating exactly, is absolutely zero. hmmm...

 

[Seattle]

I don't see quantum entanglement as having anything to do with mind reading or prediction making.

The pseudoscience community seems to love QM simply because QM seems paradoxical and "weird" and so does psi so if QM is "real" maybe so is psi.

That's not much of an argument. Washing one's hands to prevent illness used to seem weird but that doesn't suddenly breath new life into everything else that seems weird.

Weird though it might have seemed, washing hands was adopted because it works. Just being weird isn't enough.

What you are saying is that there is no evidence for mind reading or making predictions but you think that some people are able to do that and that one day we might be able to explain it via QM.

There is nothing about "spin" direction and elementary particles that has anything to do with making predictions and mind reading.

 

[Seattle]

Example (imitations of the scientific method):
A fly landed on my shoulder yesterday at exactly 10:31 am. It is impossible for the event to repeat as 10 31 am on that day has passed.
Question:
Did the fly land on my shoulder at 10: 31 am according to the scientific method?

No... so I guess it must have been a miracle or worse, a coincidence...but definitely woo woo...
Come to think of it.... if one thinks in absolute terms, the probability of an event repeating exactly, is absolutely zero. hmmm...

That's just silly.
An experiment has to be repeatable when done independently. A fly landing on your shoulder isn't an experiment. You have to have a falsifiable hypothesis. You have to test your hypothesis. If the result of the test is such that the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis is affirmed then that's a start to the scientific process.

That test also has to be repeatable by someone else independent of the first group to conduct the test.

If you test enough related matters then you go from a hypothesis to a theory such as the theory of evolution.

There is none of that going on with psi.

What psi phenomena impresses you? Are there some mind readers you find credible or some predictions that you feel are not explainable in some other way?