Telepathy

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#90
A dollar to the first one who can, at, necessarily, a distance, tell me what I'm listening to right now.

(Me: "Do not think about The Carpenters. Do not think about The Carpenters. Do not ...")

To get back to autism for a moment, I'm currently reading "Neurotribes" by Steve Silberman, a terrific (as The Donald would say) history of the diagnosis and "treatments" of the condition.

Favorite part so far - in 1920 there was an institution named the "Katharinenhof State Home for Non-Educable Feebleminded Children" in Saxony. I'd love to have the sweatshirt.
 
#94
sofaspud said:
a significant portion of the population are deficient in understanding the concept of scientific proof.
Click to expand...

Pirsig:

"As he was testing hypothesis number one by experimental method a flood of other hypotheses would come to mind, and as he was testing these, some more came to mind, and as he was testing these, still more came to mind until it became painfully evident that as he continued testing hypotheses and eliminating them or confirming them their number did not decrease. It actually increased as he went along.
At first he found it amusing. He coined a law intended to have the humor of a Parkinson’s law that "The number of rational hypotheses that can explain any given phenomenon is infinite." It pleased him never to run out of hypotheses. Even when his experimental work seemed dead-end in every conceivable way, he knew that if he just sat down and muddled about it long enough, sure enough, another hypothesis would come along. And it always did. It was only months after he had coined the law that he began to have some doubts about the humor or benefits of it.
If true, that law is not a minor flaw in scientific reasoning. The law is completely nihilistic. It is a catastrophic logical disproof of the general validity of all scientific method!"

"It looked as though the time spans of scientific truths are an inverse function of the intensity of scientific effort. Thus the scientific truths of the twentieth century seem to have a much shorter life-span than those of the last century because scientific activity is now much greater. If, in the next century, scientific activity increases tenfold, then the life expectancy of any scientific truth can be expected to drop to perhaps one-tenth as long as now. What shortens the life-span of the existing truth is the volume of hypotheses offered to replace it; the more the hypotheses, the shorter the time span of the truth. And what seems to be causing the number of hypotheses to grow in recent decades seems to be nothing other than scientific method itself. The more you look, the more you see. Instead of selecting one truth from a multitude you are increasing the multitude. What this means logically is that as you try to move toward unchanging truth through the application of scientific method, you actually do not move toward it at all. You move away from it! It is your application of scientific method that is causing it to change!"
 
#96
Cal Weldon said:
Fred, I was continuing the telepathy thing started a few posts back.
Click to expand...

It's Daniel (sorry for the confusion...), but I was (trying to) play along. 😀

Bigun: and? Not only does that quote simplify things ridiculously (reductio ad absurdum) but if our "unchanging truth" is based on a tenuous foundation, may it fall away.
 
Last edited:
#99
KBK said:
Again, for the hundredth time, for the thousandth time... all they've done in this (below shared article), is prove it (telepathy) to blowhards who incorrectly believe that science somehow defines realty. For science does not define reality, it never did. The root of science is to attempt to describe reality, science is not independent of the frame.

Reality existed for a long time before science and it exists and is of all things. So no, it did not become real because NIST made it real. But we do run into the psychosis of dogma in people who think it is not real until the misapplied and misunderstood religious parody surrounding science 'makes it real'.

The idea of telepathy in and of the people has been around since time immemorial, this gives credence to the investigations into telepathy. Scientific investigations are only as good as the people who design the given investigation.

Quantum science says that reality is an emergent phenomenon.

Reality as humans generally think of it, does not occur until it emerges from quantum considerations and as those components are compared to one another, and the differential found, is our 'reality'.

In that 'reality' AS differential in quantum associated values, we find that coupling of distant objects does indeed occur. In scientific terms, as found repeatedly, undeniably so.

NIST team proves 'spooky action at a distance' is really real.

For those who think that 'telepathy is not real', you can now officially go pound sand or eat worms, whatever you want.

This subject is dead for you, as the scientific basis for it being 100% real is now established by the very mechanisms and levers you try and pull and manipulate to say that telepathy is not real.

Please understand that I'm not angry with naysayers, per se, but I will interject at times, to curb stomp persistent pernicious pouty projected illiteracy.
Click to expand...

Our subjectivity is not in the same domain as Newtonian or quantum physics.

I think calling upon study/experiment above as a justification for saying telepathy is real is problematical due to problems of scale, domain, observational reliability, and in the case of telepathy - unlike physics - a lack of explanatory theory.

We do get subjectively 'entangled' when we do music together but as far as I know, an explanation for this doesn't require telepathy.
 
#100
Reality as humans generally think of it, does not occur until it emerges from quantum considerations and as those components are compared to one another, and the differential found, is our 'reality'.

In that 'reality' AS differential in quantum associated values, we find that coupling of distant objects does indeed occur. In scientific terms, as found repeatedly, undeniably so.
Click to expand...

As in medicine (actually, alt-med), as soon as quantum is mentioned, you know pseudo-science is at work. Another case study for the "Ignore Button".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom