New telepathy test, the sequel.

[arthwollipot]

Telepathy doesn't need to be magic, because it might occur via the exchange of electromagnetic waves (even at great distances). This may be why Einstein wrote a preface for Upton Sinclair's book "Mental Radio" in 1930...

Except that we know that electromagnetic waves don't behave in this way. We understand how the force of electromagnetism works extremely well, and it is not capable of transmitting thoughts from one brain to another. By "we" I of course mean scientists.

It is also possible that telepathy relies on still undiscovered laws of physics or psychology.

While this is technically true, it is extremely unlikely. If it is a new law of physics that we just haven't discovered yet, it would behave in consistent ways. Every person who claims that they can read minds claims that it works differently. Every. Single. One. Physics is consistent. You can do an experiment, and if someone else replicates that experiment they get the same result. That has happened exactly zero times for telepathy, despite many, many opportunities.

 

[JayUtah]

Telepathy doesn't need to be magic, because it might occur via the exchange of electromagnetic waves (even at great distances).

You're the physicist. Do the math and tell me how much electromagnetic field energy would need to occur to have a discernible effect at the distance of, say, between the United States and Belgium. Then explain how that can be produced, otherwise undetectably, by the human brain.

This may be why Einstein wrote a preface for Upton Sinclair's book "Mental Radio" in 1930

Notice how the preface says nothing about the physics involved, but only praises Sinclair for his writing ability.

It is also possible that telepathy relies on still undiscovered laws of physics or psychology.

Wishful thinking, not science.

None of this is remotely interesting until you can demonstrate that so-called telepathic communication occurs at a rate greater than chance. And none of your pseudo-science will ever do that, for the reasons abundantly presented. You admit you require that a successful result confirm your predetermined conclusion, and you admit that when performed by others, your methodology is not rigorous and is therefore irreproducible.

 

[Michel H]

tell me how much electromagnetic field energy would need to occur to have a discernible effect at the distance of, say, between the United States and Belgium. Then explain how that can be produced, otherwise undetectably, by the human brain.

You might perhaps want to take a look at this:

Is it possible to transmit to an antipode on ham frequencies?
Only if: 1) the propagation conditions are just right, 2) there is another ham listening from the antipode who hears your signal, 3) he or she is able to confirm somehow that they have heard your signal.

It's halfway around the world so usually requires: 1) the right shortwave frequency at the right time, 2) good conditions, 3) a reasonably good antenna and >=100W of power (although sometimes done with less using weak signal modes).

(https://www.reddit.com/r/amateurrad...t_possible_to_transmit_to_an_antipode_on_ham/)

The power of the brain is 20 Watt.

A radio amateur would be glad when he finds a good transmission with the antipode, same thing for a telepathy amateur.

 

[jsfisher]

You might perhaps want to take a look at this:

(https://www.reddit.com/r/amateurrad...t_possible_to_transmit_to_an_antipode_on_ham/)

The power of the brain is 20 Watt.

A radio amateur would be glad when he finds a good transmission with the antipode, same thing for a telepathy amateur.

So, at what frequency are you alleging the brain transmits? Let's make this simple: HF and below or VHF and above?
What is the antenna?
What is the SWR for the antenna?

(The frequency and SWR are easily measured things. Strange, though, they haven't been measured. Why would that be?)

ETA: The brain is more like 12W in total. How much of that goes to RF transmission?

 

[JayUtah]

You might perhaps want to take a look at this:

I did, with some amusement. You claim to be a published physicist and all you can come up with is a Reddit thread? You realize that there are geometric constraints to the notion of antipodes? How does that relate to where you are and where all the people are who you claim are receiving your thoughts?

The power of the brain is 20 Watt.

That's how much power the human brain consumes. And how much of that is manifested in electromagnetic field energy? And why does it seem to escape all detection? Your "source" estimates a minimum of 100 W is required to transmit a radio signal to the antipode. How do you reconcile that?

A radio amateur would be glad when he finds a good transmission with the antipode, same thing for a telepathy amateur.

No, none of this shows that electromagnetic field energy is or can be remotely responsible for the "thought projection" you claim you can do.

 

[Michel H]

So, at what frequency are you alleging the brain transmits? Let's make this simple: HF and below or VHF and above?
What is the antenna?
What is the SWR for the antenna?

(The frequency and SWR are easily measured things. Strange, though, they haven't been measured. Why would that be?)

ETA: The brain is more like 12W in total. How much of that goes to RF transmission?

The power radiated by the brain in the radio frequency range seems to have never been measured (this would perhaps be a good thing to know for a scientific study of extra-sensory perception).

 

[JayUtah]

The power radiated by the brain in the radio frequency range seems to have never been measured (this would perhaps be a good thing to know for a scientific study of extra-sensory perception).

Are you sure it's never been measured?

 

[arthwollipot]

The power radiated by the brain in the radio frequency range seems to have never been measured (this would perhaps be a good thing to know for a scientific study of extra-sensory perception).

If it existed in any significant amount, it would flood the airwaves. Pretty much every frequency in the electromagnetic spectrum is actively monitored. We'd have seen it by now, surely.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

When this EM transmission notion came up before, I likened it to the roaring voices of a crowd in a football stadium being heard and understood by another crowd in another stadium in another country. The suggestion really is a lot like that. I also recall suggesting Michel experiment with going to places radio does not readily escape such as a deep basement or a submarine. Anywhere his mobile phone does not work. And see if the sensation of being overheard diminishes.

Maybe then have a think about why it is he who has the sensation of his thoughts being heard and not us, and ponder whether it might indeed just be a compelling illusion created entirely within his own head.

 

[Carrot Flower King]

The power of the amplifier over in the corner is 300W into a 8ohm load, but it certainly isn't transmitting anything to Belgium...

Just in case it is or I am, what music am I playing through it (I'm going over tothe shelves and picking a disc now)?

 

[MRC_Hans]

The power radiated by the brain in the radio frequency range seems to have never been measured (this would perhaps be a good thing to know for a scientific study of extra-sensory perception).

Incorrect. It has been explored extensively, for various medical purposes. It is in the nanowatt range (very very little).

One of your problems is that you try to make up for your lack of knowledge with guesswork.

Hans

 

[JayUtah]

Incorrect. It has been explored extensively, for various medical purposes. It is in the nanowatt range (very very little).

One of your problems is that you try to make up for your lack of knowledge with guesswork.

Hans

I'm not sure which -ography you mean. If you're talking about electroencephalography, that's measuring an electrical potential, not the radiated electromagnetic power. Standard EEG measurements are in microvolts and are measuring the voltage difference across various standardized points on the scalp. Electrocorticography does the same thing, but with the electrodes on the cortex itself. There's also promising technology coming out of Australia that uses endovascular electrodes. The brain has a very weak electrical field, but electric field encephalography is a thing. It requires considerable signal processing to obtain a usable reading, and that may be where you're getting values in watts. For a power density measurement, it would need to be normalized to a reference surface area. The brain also has a magnetic field, but it's even weaker, and magnetoencephalography exists too, and has the same limitations.

But as you would expect, electromagnetic radiation was one of the first things proposed to explain ESP and hence one of the first things eliminated by science via measurement, going back to the 1940s. The only measurable electromagnetic radiation emitted by the brain is in the infrared band. But then again, your buttcheeks also emit electromagnetic radiation in the infrared band, because both they and your brain are body-temperature objects.

The practical limit is that if a brain were emitting 10-20 watts of EMR in the radio-frequency band, it would be trivially easy to detect. In fact, it would be highly annoying to anyone else in the vicinity trying to do various things with some kinds of electronic equipment. We can easily rule out electromagnetic radiation as a practical vehicle for ESP.

But we have the cart before the horse. Scrambling to find a mechanism to explain an observation must wait until there's an observation. That is, the ability of a person to guess what someone else is thinking at a rate greater than chance is the inescapable requirement. Michel simply declares that he doesn't need to do that and that anyone who says he does must be a simpleton. Paradoxically he's still trying to get that happy p-value, but he has to visibly cheat to do it.

 

[JayUtah]

Just in case it is or I am, what music am I playing through it (I'm going over tothe shelves and picking a disc now)?

"Eye in the Sky" by the Alan Parsons Project. The lyrics are a dead giveaway.

 

[jsfisher]

Incorrect. It has been explored extensively, for various medical purposes. It is in the nanowatt range (very very little).

One of your problems is that you try to make up for your lack of knowledge with guesswork.

Hans

...and the frequency is in the 10 to 100 Hz range.

Michel H's assertion that telepathy may be an RF effect is riddled with problems.

 

[Carrot Flower King]

"Eye in the Sky" by the Alan Parsons Project. The lyrics are a dead giveaway.

Nothing by The Alan Parsons Project is to be found in this house nor ever will be.

For avoidance of any doubt, no lyrics were involved...But I could have played another recording of some of the same music by one of Michel's countrymen, who is always on my list of famous Belgians (and no, it isn't Eddy Merckx version of Sound of Winning Paris-Roubaix...).

ETA Yes, I do do know that was a joke...

 

[JayUtah]

...and the frequency is in the 10 to 100 Hz range.

Indeed, I've seen my own brain ticking away on the EEG. (A lot of my EEs come from a neuroscience background and have some cool toys.) But that's where the gambit is. It's easy to say that various forms of electrically-based encephalography miss the mark because they're dealing with entirely the wrong frequencies. It's easy to bluff and say that diagnostic measurements of the brain's electrical activity won't pick up what's also happening -- allegedly -- in the kilohertz and megahertz ranges. But if that's the case, then I can measure your brain's EMR with the AM radio in my grandfather's old Mercedes.

Michel still hasn't told us the actual radiated power density or frequency he thinks this works on, and I suspect he never will. All we get are Googled-up Reddit theads and a lot of ignorant handwaving.

Michel H's assertion that telepathy may be an RF effect is riddled with problems.

Which is why it was briefly contemplated and then discarded in the 1940s. Why someone who presents himself as a published physicist would even consider the notion today boggles my mind.

Now he can say that only he and perhaps a few other "thought projectors" are emitting these signals, thus the signals aren't going to be observed by measurements of the general population. (The early EMR experiments, however, used subjects who professed psi capabilities, or were "tested" to have such ability.) But there's the receiver to consider. In order for him to project his thoughts to significant numbers of people all over the world, those people would have to be susceptible to EMR at radio frequencies. And that susceptibility is not just something that would go unnoticed for the century or so in which we've used RF technology extensively. Why can't we use just plain old radio waves emitted by any old emitter to implant ideas in people's heads in a reliable way? Or even an unreliable way? All we seem to be able to do is make people nauseous and given them headaches.

 

[Darat]

...and the frequency is in the 10 to 100 Hz range.

Michel H's assertion that telepathy may be an RF effect is riddled with problems.

And the idea that no one has tested for such is a rather extraordinary claim in of itself.

Of course 30 seconds with a search engine would tell Michel H that such measurements have been done.

For example - form a search I typed in 30 seconds ago: https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask-an-engineer/can-brain-waves-interfere-with-radio-waves/

 

[jsfisher]

And the idea that no one has tested for such is a rather extraordinary claim in of itself.

Of course 30 seconds with a search engine would tell Michel H that such measurements have been done.

For example - form a search I typed in 30 seconds ago: https://engineering.mit.edu/engage/ask-an-engineer/can-brain-waves-interfere-with-radio-waves/

Yeah, but who should we believe: Reddit or just some random highly-respected institution of higher learning?

 

[Dave Rogers]

For avoidance of any doubt, no lyrics were involved...But I could have played another recording of some of the same music by one of Michel's countrymen, who is always on my list of famous Belgians (and no, it isn't Eddy Merckx version of Sound of Winning Paris-Roubaix...).

Ca plane pour moi?

Dave

 

[JayUtah]

Yeah, but who should we believe: Reddit or just some random highly-respected institution of higher learning?

The Reddit thread was a reasonably coherent explanation of how to communicate over long distances using customary ham radio equipment. It obviously had nothing to do with neuroscience, nor did it in any way support the claim that RF phenomena could be the transport mechanism for human thought from one brain to another. The technical parameters discussed in the thread seem entirely reasonable from the point of view of radio telecommunications technology, at least in terms of the estimates of antenna requirements and transmitter power requirements. They're simply irrelevant to and incompatible with Michel's claims.

Michel claims to be a fully-credentialled physicist possessing, I believe, a doctoral level degree in the field. He has purported to have published in physics journals and has cited to a number of published papers he claims to have either authored or co-authored. Given that purported foundation of expertise, references to a Reddit thread discussing an unrelated subject seems inappropriate when the request was that he compute himself the physical requirements necessary for the brain to accomplish what he claimed might be the case. This is a case in which I would expect even a physics student to have arrived correctly and with justification at the conclusion that the claimed phenomenon is physically impossible.