A Lucid Proposal For A Preliminary Test

[LordoftheLeftHand]

How about something other than cards with the five symbols? How about cards with common words on them?

LLH

 

[Manny]

No, number nine does not address the problem. Number nine is just a cutoff that keeps the claimant from making the test last forever and forcing the test to be cancelled. ("I would have won, had they only allowed me ONE MORE MINUTE!")

Unless I miss the puzzle, would not the problem be solved if the wife's communication of her having sent the signal and the observer's communication of that fact were independently times? In other words, "Mrs. MP" would have "up to two minutes" to send the signal and the observer would confirm at "exactly two minutes" that she had done so?

I also wonder about 7 symbols only once. I'd hate to see 500 people request the same test and one get lucky. Something like "7 correct symbols in three consecutive trials" or "not fewer than 6 correct symbols in 8 of 10 consecutive trials" might fit the bill for both sides. Though I also join in the chorus of people hastening to add that I do not represent the JREF, I'm just in the peanut gallery.

I also join in the congratulations to you, Mental Professor for a lucid, clear proposal. You may find it a touch condescending that so many people are acknowledging something which seems not all that difficult. If so I apologize. I can only say that we've seen just a huge number of challenge applications which were an absolute mess. Best of luck in your challenge!

 

[Rasmus]

How about something other than cards with the five symbols? How about cards with common words on them?

Why is everybody so much against the cards?

If the prof is sufficiently trained and experienced using EPS symbols, then by all means let him use those.

I see that it increases the chance of cheating - but I don't think that things need to be overly complicated as long as the protocol is sufficiently tight.

Rasmus.

 

[petre]

Why is everybody so much against the cards?

If the prof is sufficiently trained and experienced using EPS symbols, then by all means let him use those.

I see that it increases the chance of cheating - but I don't think that things need to be overly complicated as long as the protocol is sufficiently tight.

Rasmus.

Agreed, it would be possible to classify any symbol set and map them to the original set if some deception is planned. The familiar cards should be fine, and I'm confident JREF will sufficiently account for communication opportunities.

 

[Rasmus]

Agreed, it would be possible to classify any symbol set and map them to the original set if some deception is planned. The familiar cards should be fine, and I'm confident JREF will sufficiently account for communication opportunities.

Well, if you have 5 or 10 or another relatively small number of distinct symbols then you could use a neasy and direct code. Random words, however, would make this impossible or at least require a much more difficult technique.

But since there have been discussions about coin flips recently, I think being able to tell which of 5 symbols is being transmitted is paranormal. If the claimant doesn't have another ability, then that shouödn't be a reason to not let him do the challenge.

Rasmus.

 

[ChristineR]

I see no problem with cards per se, but Nguyen's protocol won't work with cards. If the goal is to get past the back-forth and do the test as quickly as possible, "Nguyen with cards" wouldn't be my starting point in my application.

 

[Rasmus]

I see no problem with cards per se, but Nguyen's protocol won't work with cards.

No, but nowhere does it say we have to use that as a starting point, right?

(I think you were saying just that in your next sentence, but I am not really receiving your thouhgs on this clearly enough)

Rasmus.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

Perhaps wait for Mental Professor's next post we should?

 

[ChristineR]

No, but nowhere does it say we have to use that as a starting point, right?

(I think you were saying just that in your next sentence, but I am not really receiving your thouhgs on this clearly enough)

Rasmus.

People were suggesting that the Prof just use Nguyen's protocol to save the hassle of making his own. But if the cards are his thing, I don't think thats a good idea.

 

[Rasmus]

People were suggesting that the Prof just use Nguyen's protocol to save the hassle of making his own. But if the cards are his thing, I don't think thats a good idea.

Ah ...

I think so far he has displayed roughly as much as the accumulated reasoning skills of at least 90% of all past applicants - I think if he keeps that up there won't be a problem designing a new protocol. His first draft looks promising to say the least.

And Nguyen's protocol at least suggests that some sort of communication betwene the rooms is permissable - even if not during the trial.

One idea if some degree of coordination is required:

The receiver signals readiness to receive.
The sender then has 5 minutes to begin sending.
Anytime after the 5 minutes, the receiver can confirm through another signal if the symbol has been received.*

After a break, if needed, the process starts over.

This ensures that the two can coordinate their effortd. At the same time it makes it impossible for the sender to reveal any information about the symbols.

It gives the sender time to concentrate, prepare, meditate, etc. and then start sending.

* This provides for some flexibility in the process; at the same time it ensures that the prep-time will not be disturbed.

The protocol so far lacks provsions for the unblinded testing, i.e. an initial run with a known sequence of symbols and possibly even an opportunity to check the detection of sending vs. non-sending .

I realize all of this will make the test more complicated and I am eager to see what others have to say.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

Perhaps wait for Mental Professor's next post we should?

 

[Rasmus]

Perhaps wait for Mental Professor's next post we should?

But that would be boring!

 

[GzuzKryzt]

But that would be boring!

But efficient! (Deutsche Tugenden können nützlich sein.)

 

[Gr8wight]

Of course the insistance on those specific symbols makes me think of the possibility of a pre-rehearsed act. If you can truly read your wife's thoughts, why does the symbol used matter?

That was the first thing I thought of when I saw the name "Mental Professor." He's a mentalist by trade. He has an act set up with his wife that he believes will fool people. My guess, anyway.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Your wife may not choose when to say "sending" and you may not choose when to say "received." These must be done at predetermined intervals.

I think you nailed this one. Good work!

 

[Rasmus]

Of course the insistance on those specific symbols makes me think of the possibility of a pre-rehearsed act. If you can truly read your wife's thoughts, why does the symbol used matter?

I missed this bit earlier.

Granting him the benefit of the doubt, the cards/symbols are pretty much standard in that type of experiment (or performance). Suggesting them makes things easier, since they are well understood, non-ambigious and easily obtained.

And it is possible that the thoughts that are being send and received are less clear than spoken or written language. So it might be possible to communicate one of a few predetermined symbols, but not neccesarily anything completely arbitrary.

But yes, it gotta be a trick or act - nobody can really belive that a man will understand his woman's thoughts. (That might well be worthy of the grand million dollar price even if they were allowed to talk ...)

Rasmus.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

Perhaps wait for Mental Professor's next post we should?

 

[ChaoticLimbs]

This would be a fantastically interesting test to perform. I myself would be impressed with seven out of 20 attempts yielding an accurate answer, as my attempts to read my wife's mind have been fruitless. For example, if, in a darkened parking garage, I were to call out to my wife, "where are you?" she would almost certainly answer "over here".

 

[Mental Professor]

Response 2

My first chance to get back to the computer...

"nobody can really belive that a man will understand his woman's thoughts."

My wife enjoyed that one. I said 'read her mind', not 'understand her thoughts'! UFO's- maybe. Creationism- a slim possibility. But comprehending the female psyche? I'd bet on Gheller bending spoons before that happens.

"This leads nicely to the real problem. Your wife may not choose when to say "sending" and you may not choose when to say "received." These must be done at predetermined intervals."

I think the problem is that previous ESP tests have focused on the receiver's state of mind vs. the sender's. My wife goes into a relaxed alpha state and she can send her thoughts. When she is reaching that point, she will nod to the observer to say 'sending'. My intuition has greater accuracy at that point, although I cannot tell the difference and will not know my success rate until the test is completed.

As I stated before, we will both remove all jewelry rings, watches, glasses, shoes, etc. and leave them off during the entire test. We will be 'wanded' with a metal detector and you may use any type of detecting device to insure that we are not transmitting. We will have no say in the room location, conditions, etc. If you prefer, we will not talk at any time when observers are transmitting via walkie-talkies. Only two words should be spoken once the test has begun; 'sending' and 'received'.

"Forgive me for asking a blunt question: Do you really believe you and your wife share an ESP connection, or do you plan to win the prize by cheating?"

I've never cheated on my wife, but I didn't know they were offering a prize for that. I think that JREF's protocols are sufficient to insure that a charlatan would not win the prize. After 17 years of marriage, I'd have to say that we definitely have an ESP connection.

"1) A negotiated protocol by JREF would probably not like having a radio transmitter in your wife's room and a radio receiver in your room. Obviously looking to avoid any clandestine methods of transmitting information. Some other method (pre-arranged times, five minute intervals, etc.) would preclude having to have any communication between rooms, as long as that scenario fits in with your ability. Edit: And, of course, ChristineR's reason which I blithely neglected.

2) For practical reasons, one would want to know several things from your own initial investigations into the phenomenon to conduct a valid test. How far apart can you and your wife be? (We'd want to make sure that the test didn't fail because you'd tried it 20 feet apart, but the test rooms were 100 feet apart.) You posit being able to do it through a Faraday Cage -- do you foresee any other standard building materials that would prevent transmission?"

Radios seemed acceptable in Nguyen's test. I only followed that protocol. So far, we've had no issues with building materials, etc. We've always done the demonstrations with walkie talkies so I assume that the limit would be the transmission range.

"Instead there would be five different "standard Rhine" ESP symbols (star, circle, square, wavy lines and the cross), each duplicated ten times."

That is correct. That's what we've used for practice.

 

[Timothy]

Well, go ahead and apply. The quicker you do so, the quicker you and the JREF Challenge Desk can bicker over the part that makes it a parlor trick, and officially decline your application. Then we can all get back to normal.

Nice try, though.

- Timothy