Saturday, 16 March 2013

Telepathy - the inquiry continues with new leads too

In terms of Ganzfeld Zimmer experiments (only sound isolation, no special light other than slight dimming of white light), that this way may provide better use:

1. Make sure the participants have open minds for it, that they are prepared to accept such, telepathy, or have a weak/strong suspicion towards it.

2. Make sure they are emotionally prepared, that they are told of the "respects toward own feelings routine" before entering the experiment and that this preparation can be academically improved, by a type of guidance, opposite sex/gender or not. There is also the question whether the participants should bring friends/acquaintances they are confident with, and I think this represents a good beginning, although, there are probably other ways that work too, Helsinki-Declaration in hand, general research ethics...

3. Some (para-)psychologists may have "strong opinions" on the outcome and are not fit or suitable for conducting this type of research, they should be removed from (every) possible set of researchers...

Importantly: There is also a bigger, tacit assumption to this "game" and it is how the senses/the feelings relate to this, FORCING the entire psychology onto a new direction by train rails, that a finding probably sends a battalion of idiots right out to where they belong...!!!

Important 2: That we go with alpha-numbers at 5% or lower, that the Zener cards are kept to 4, that the subjects are to choose a comfort zone as options provide inside the Ganzfeld-zimmers. That an outcome on 8% means success, if not the very numbers higher up!

Good luck!

Further note (beyond Good luck):
I find that lie-detectors can be useful as post-experiment control.
We may use these questions:

1. Have you done your best during this experiment? (Presumably yes.)

2. Have you been open to the question of telepathy? (Presumably yes.)

3. Are you convinced now to the question of telepathy? (Open to yes/no.)

Remember that the presence of lie-detectors can heighten the seriousness of the experiment (to some subjects, maybe not all).

1. One book to start with, in determining a whole field of all, papers and books alike, all "meta-studies included", but intelligently... This book fx. has an ESP topic to it: - +/- page 139. Introduction to Psychology - Hardcover: 768 pages, Publisher: Wadsworth Publishing; 9 edition (Feb 25 2010), Language: English, ISBN-10: 0495903442, ISBN-13: 978-0495903444.

2. Urls: (only Wikipedia for now, sorry.)

3. Remember to add the "Truthiness"-aspects...
as notion to the researchers themselves or others, by the questionnaires to the participants or so...

4. Here is an interesting link further: that includes "some views/findings" on the Ganzfeld studies altogether...

5. You know, when the god-d*mn sociologists can't f*cking relate to PRIMARY literature, sitting on a "golden degree" that they probably never should have had and poor in reading the very literature, if not the Scientology itself... then what about our "friends", the psychologists... Probably not all...


  1. The hiding of mental illness and obfuscation:
    It may be noticeable that psychopathics (and possibly some or all, to degrees, schizophrenics), classically speaking, given the literature, lack (entirely) the possibility to relate by feelings, to relate emotionally, to be compassionate, and with the cognition too, and that, of course, this enters, as implied already, the context here.

    The mental illness labels, of worst:
    By this, you may want to note these:
    mis-neuro-philes, haters of feelings
    mis-omni-philes, haters of all
    misaphiles, haters of boys, men
    misophiles, haters of girls, women.

    ESP and God:
    ESP and God deepen this further, that they have hidden, actively, motivating facts from the general public for them to feel strenghtened in believing in God, not the other way, that science would discredit them in believing in God, like in this way, by fake data, by the fake papers/science reports.

    Their motto:
    That "sanity enough for them (who don't know anything)"...

  2. Here's another /top/ book reference by Dean Radin, url from Amazon, , and with this creditation from NY Times too, "Recently profiled in the NY Times Magazine, Dean Radin is perhaps the most respected parapsychologist in the country. An articulate, engaging communicator, he wields impeccable credentials, a healthy skepticism & a meticulous scientific method to put psi phenomona like ...", that he's not a rural rat by any way of the meaning. I think this now looks *SET*. Cheers!

  3. Also corrected a typo in "sends" minus the plural -s.

  4. The Course of Work for Telepathy and More

    Under the psychiatric worries in obtaining more definite theory for Psychiatry, also plainly cited under Philosophy of Science where I've picked it up during my 2000-studies before relocating to Sandnes and police complaint, in getting my head together, shattering a glass of illusions to (pro-active) police work,
    further, under the somatists-html-file, by 2003, somewhere:
    Patient.html - file, (Patience is a Cardinal Virtue!)
    with the publishing date of likelihood of about 28 April 2004.
    commentsabutort.html - file, with the definite publishing date of 28 January 2003.

    All of these represent the long-haul work toward this point in 2013. If I am right, also in holding a reliable world-name originating far back then in 1983/1984 then the premier work-performance, the achievement is exactly this, right here, before your eyes.

  5. Notes of general interest:
    Psychiatry as science is defended/disciplined by two Boards of Authority,
    the Ethics Board
    the Science Board

    Code of Conduct for Psychiatrists
    Code of Conduct for Psychologists
    + the research ethics of the Helsinki Declaration.

    (The Hippocratic Oath is also (very much) outdated!)

  6. A Possible Explanation to the Phenomenon of "Telepathy"

    Telepathy Experiment and Method
    This is a telepathic experiment (for all to try), just using the web or email.

    It goes like this:
    Poster A posts a few lines of some interest...
    Poster B posts some thoughts that Poster A may be planning to write next...
    Poster A edits his first post as the answer... and decides on the truth value of B's post by making so in a new post...
    Then this is reversed and Poster A speculates over Poster B's next move...

    Anyone interested... (At least this is a generative method one can apply over the internet everywhere...)
    There is no problem with the confirmation either since Poster A and Poster B will know one another's answers and the definite truth value to the telepathy and the experiment!

    (This is really an angle into the phenomenon of telepathy as much as a scientific method as a kind of research design, all in all, asserting 3 entities.)

    More plainly:
    The exchange of posts/emails/chat messenger texting aims to hit the thoughts of the person you have engaged with for confirmation of telepathy. So you basically exchange (fairly short) messages until you're safely with one-another telepathically. Again, friendship makes a ten-fold increase in both joy for conducting it, the likelihood of obtaining confirmation fast or at all, and a stronger friendship to go in getting through.

    Important note,
    my emphasis on telepathy is still rated the highest by "Opinions on Science..." and is still found there as text too, besides under the specialised file/blog posting Somatist and Somatists-html-file.

  7. The Case of Telepathy:
    I'm only interested in giving "telepathy" a representation in physics insofar as it exists. Its existence will not be discussed in this topic by myself, at least!

    Either way, one reply reminds me of this by Bladerunner:
    By Bladerunner, it says:
    Replicant: Tortoise? What's that?
    Mr. Holden: You know what a turtle is?
    Replicant: Of course!
    Mr. Holden: Same thing!
    Replicant: I've never seen a turtle!

    By Bladerunner [further in by the scene], it says:
    Mr Holden: But it can't! Not without your help! But you're not helping!
    Replicant: What do you mean I'm not helping?
    Mr. Holden: I mean you're not helping!

    It's somewhat similar with telepathy, if you're not interested in being open towards it, I couldn't give a damn! I'm not some telepathy-evangelist, hammering telepathy into people's minds! No, I'm all ignorant about it except for bringing out information that may bring telepathy to a greater range/number of people and in turn increase their own joy of life! If you don't care, so be it! It's that simple!

    If you master/know about telepathy, then implicitly, you do understand more to your life than before and even so, your consciousness has increased because you know about it. I also hold that your rationality has increased because you remove all those subtle signals that you now are aware of! In fact, I think you've become a better human!

    There is indeed a common explanation in physics that can be used in this relation and it's called Twin Spin. I don't know where it's from or what evidence/experiments that are underlying this term. You can search a little too if you want.

    I think it goes: let's say a person somehow sends one's thoughts through the air/space (by particles/photons or such) and these carry with them "signals" that are transferred to particles such that telepathy obtains and these particles display thus this "twin spin"!

    I hope you like this little addition. I must say that "twin spin" has been out in the world of physics for quite a while now (10 -15 years?) and that I'm not attempting to write something new. "Twin Spin" is not my invention!

    Just because some people support the short-sight doesn't mean that this topic has been successfully discussed, the case of telepathy.
    Conclusion: I recognise that I've been airing some views on the physics foundation of telepathy in terms of serious reductionism that I really believe in. I also see that more literature-research is to necessary to determine the most plausible argument of this telepathy phenomenon. I probably won't add more to this topic, but you are, of course, welcome to add the whole world to this topic if you want to!

  8. To your help:
    By NYTimes, quote:
    "One of psychology’s most respected journals has agreed to publish a paper presenting what its author describes as strong evidence for extrasensory perception, the ability to sense future events."
    "The paper describes nine unusual lab experiments performed over the past decade by its author, Daryl J. Bem, an emeritus professor at Cornell, testing the ability of college students to accurately sense random events, like whether a computer program will flash a photograph on the left or right side of its screen. The studies include more than 1,000 subjects."

    My underlining.
    Thus, Daryl J. Bem, Cornell University is the man to look up for. I stick with him as I find it definite too or "statistically significant" as it's otherwise expressed!
    First of all, people should cite properly! And the same people should credits (that we know of) to deem significant research vs. insignificant research (to which I favour prof. Bem's judgment)!

    Moreover, such an off-hand remark over the "thousands of failed experiments" carries no weight as 1. they are not referenced and 2. they are taken out of thin air where they are uttered by people who have no literature study to show for!

  9. Let me add another point.
    Just because people have had "farm machines" and use these to prove that the Neutron exists and they've failed at it many thousands of times, doesn't mean that the Neutron doesn't exist because it does exist! And it has been proven by people who used the proper equipment and apparatus. So number is not equal to authority or truth value as in number of experiments or so.

    It's worth mentioning that it has been published in a renowned journal which may indicate a certain prestige or weight of both the professor and this particular kind of research.

    An analogy may be that some people who have invested time and serious interest and found telepathy are matched with "morons" who are even refusing to see the possibility for it. It's hard, therefore, to show for anything else than correlation to these people who don't know.

    Point 2. I support James Randi and he's been effective in removing idiot science (thus pseudo-science) out of the serious picture. I also think that he has made a prize for a special kind of the ESP and that his description of a certain aspect of ESP doesn't really entail telepathy.

    Also, you fail to recognise that there are 9, nine, different set-ups and you, by your mistake, reason consequently that the whole research is just crap despite the 10, ten, years of continuous efforts! Considering your sloppy approach, I don't think you need to investigate this further. No, leave it to able people, like prof. Bem!

    Besides, I've noted before that I really support the best experiment (set-up) to determine Telepathy and this is to my knowledge the "ganzfeld experiment" set-up. Also, one may do well to separate initially those who are positive to such an experiment/phenomenon and those who are negative because the negative people do mostly represent a drag that's not useful!

  10. Some more on the telepathy issue:
    First of all, I'd like to make the note that prof. Bem seems to have emphasised the harder parts of ESP and not the easier part that's telepathy. I find this dubious! Secondly, I think their data-set has been fixed so that 53% is 53% and not the much clearer rate with the much more able people of about 80%. People are thus inclined to think that this investigation by prof. Bem is only at this slim level. That the results are not significant when it can easily show that actually are by making a clearer correlation by the more able people!

    I also happen to believe that USA thinks of telepathy as "high" (or "highest" by word of a woman in USA) as in having a high standing, you know, as skill or importance of a mindful faculty. It's therefore my "damn" recommendation that the rest of the world comes to grips with this and makes it "high" in their society as well. I easily think that the schizophrenic's story of being possessed with a person can be transferred to being a kind of political science where USA more or less regulates the world based on personality type put into a larger system of parts to play in dominating the world. That is, the subversive types to operate against all foreign issues and the constructive types to work on domestic issues. I loathe to sound like this theorist of conspiracy, but this is actually a story! Your ignorance to telepathy may get costly!

    I think also that prof. Bem knows that projecting faculties of the mind can more easily cause anxiety and chaos rather than the more pleasant telepathy, that when privacy is maintained, it creates a very positive role in people's lives in that it reinforces people's connections and makes life seem more lively and colourful! So in reading about this future event reading, take a step back, and rather pursue telepathy first since it's more basic in my opinion.

    1. conclusion: I think prof. Bem has made a deliberately "weak" case for himself and that there is more in this than commoners know. I also think he's been dishonest in keeping telepathy back-hand, a kind of sleight of hand trick to the world, a statement, perhaps. Beware of this, please! And I can only recommend the thoroughest evaluation of his research, including definite knowledge of the underlying data and all else!

    I also like to add that I suspect that USA has been going at this for 150 years or so and enabling this special view to the rest of the world, setting up a kind of political science of control! The rest is for you to discover!

    In an old writing from 2004 (the old forum), I've connected projecting faculties of the mind with reports I've read on the amagdyla and it's role in this. You may want to add this to your inquiry! The amagdyla from Wikipedia:! I'll try to locate it even!

    Second stage of defence for telepathy:
    First, the existence of telepathy in science is based on particle physics, namely quantum mechanics and the phenomenon of twin particles. Instances where 2 particles have the same condition or the same spin of up to great distances apart.

    Secondly, it is referred to the Amygdala-area in the brain where a plain scientific test pinpointed the active braincells while in 'telepathic' state or where the subject is experiencing telepathy.

  11. Thirdly, telepathic witnesses to crimes have been used with great success in aiding the police detectives. An experienced police-detective said he would not hesitate to recommend psychics in aiding the police to solve serious crime. There are plenty of the series, just watch Discovery Channel.

    Fourthly, telepathy has been connected to the ability to foresee events. That is when one is thinking of the future, the ability is somewhat similar to projecting what is going to happen. Same again with amygdala-related tasks.

    Fifthly, I recall something from the BBC News just recently where one is to review the position one has on people hearing voices, not only those mentally ill. This is all I have to say for now. "Science will probably teach us all what there is to it in some time, but for now I believe in telepathy and many with me." (2/2 with the above text.)

  12. (Awful and coarse track-record/time-stamp record. Please, look away. "Technical" interest only.)

    Aetixintro by the old Philosophy Now forum, in bits and pieces, deleted/partially deleted, please check with Philosophy Now for time spans/deletion status, writes:
    "Posted: Sat Oct 14, 2006 5:29 pm Post subject: Re: is telepathy possible?"
    Post subject: Re: A Possible Explanation to the Phenomenon of "Telepathy" PostPosted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 12:23 am UTC + 1 hour
    [Edit, 30.04.2011:] I've added a small note on "highest". [End of edit.]
    Post subject: Re: A Possible Explanation to the Phenomenon of "Telepathy" PostPosted: Sat Apr 23, 2011 10:07 pm
    [Edit, 04.05.2011:] Added some extra lines from the Bladerunner movie in this interview situation! [End of edit.]
    Post subject: Re: A Possible Explanation to the Phenomenon of "Telepathy" Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2011 11:20 am
    Post subject: Re: A Possible Explanation to the Phenomenon of "Telepathy" PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2011 5:45 am
    Post subject: Re: A Possible Explanation to the Phenomenon of "Telepathy" PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2011 8:11 am
    Post subject: Re: A Possible Explanation to the Phenomenon of "Telepathy" PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2011 1:35 pm
    Post subject: Re: A Possible Explanation to the Phenomenon of "Telepathy" PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2011 11:51 pm
    Post subject: Re: A Possible Explanation to the Phenomenon of "Telepathy" PostPosted: Sat Apr 23, 2011 8:47 pm

  13. Addition:
    Further note (beyond Good luck):
    I find that lie-detectors can be useful as post-experiment control.
    We may use these questions:

    1. Have you done your best during this experiment? (Presumably yes.)

    2. Have you been open to the question of telepathy? (Presumably yes.)

    3. Are you convinced now to the question of telepathy? (Open to yes/no.)

    Remember that the presence of lie-detectors can heighten the seriousness of the experiment (to some subjects, maybe not all).

  14. Entering some more, a helpful website:

    "Telepathy is one of the most powerful psychic abilities. It is known as mind to mind communication, which are feelings exchanged between a sender and a receiver. In order to properly transmit a message, you have to first believe wholeheartedly that it will work. After believing, and meditating for a few minutes, it then becomes really easy to transmit a message. While some people think this can only be accomplished by a professional, it can in fact be done by even the most novice of personalities. It should be noted that not everyone will be successful at performing telepathy."

  15. The point with psychological experiments of telepathy is to prove telepathy, not the misfits!

    Priming of participants now!