A Lucid Proposal For A Preliminary Test

[deBergerac]

First let me say thank you for the very clear suggestion for a protocol.
But I have to ask one question that it seems to me that you avoided.

Is it your suggestion that the radio message be sent when your wife nods her head?
This will probably not be accepted.

And a follow up question:
Is it possible for you to perform if the time intervals are fixed?

 

[porch]

"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.

At this point, Mental Professor, I have to suspect you of what I call "honest lying." That's when you're trying to pull off a lie, but have a hard time doing it when asked a direct question, so you try to find ways of lying without "really" lying.

"I think that JREF's protocols are sufficient to insure that a charlatan would not win the prize."

Not really saying whether or not you plan on cheating, is it?

"After 17 years of marriage, I'd have to say that we definitely have an ESP connection."

Yes, when you are very close to someone, you can say, in a fashion of speaking, that you have a psychic link of some sort. This leaves open the possibility that you have 'an ESP connection', and plan on cheating.

My advice is this: If you intend to lie, do it wholehog. No prisoners! At least, that's what I've gleaned from my experiences as a very poor liar.

 

[Sleepy]

Maybe one of the parties should be placed in a faraday cage to prevent any high-tech cheating.

 

[NiallM]

My guess is that a predetermined gap between the sending of the "received" message and the sending of the "transmitted" message indicates the card. 20 seconds for wavy line, 10 seconds for square etc etc. It means the first card is a guess (one in five), then the rest should follow.

The protocol should enusure that both messages are at rigidly fixed intervals.

 

[Lothian]

My understanding of the protocol is that; for the first card the wife says she is ready. ‘Sending’ is transmitted then the first card is turned over. Once that card is ‘received’ and the recording of that card witnessed and recorded then ‘Received’ is radioed back.

This is then repeated. As long as the next card is not revealed to the wife before ‘Sending’ is transmitted and as long as the receiver does not go back and amend ‘guesses’ I don’t see a problem with the protocol. (But I may be missing a trick)

 

[Antiquehunter]

The protocol should enusure that both messages are at rigidly fixed intervals.

Or simply completely randomized. 'Sender' notifies invigilator that they have 'sent'. Invigilator may send signal to 'Receiver' at any point in time within an x second interval (up to two minutes for sake of argument). However, without the use of a consistent interval or a completely random interval between communication, the likelihood for the 'receiver' to be influenced by counting seconds etc... is significant.

I'm puzzled - not having any ESP ability myself - why would a 'receiver' need to be notified of when to 'receive'? Wouldn't the 'receiver' get the message without being prompted to look for it?

-AH.

 

[NiallM]

I agree. Fixed or totally random. So long as it's not in the control of the sender.

But, as you imply, a one-way communication should be adequate.

The sender is shown a card and no communication is made to indicate either a start or and end to transmission.

When the receiver indicates that she has recieved the message and writes down teh message, then all that is necessary is to send back the word "received". At this stage, the next card is turned over and transmission begins and so on.

The communication should be one-way only.

 

[Ririon]

...The communication should be one-way only.

I like the idea that all non-paranormal communication between the two should go in the opposite direction of the ESP communication.

 

[Mendeli]

Why is it always that they transmit between rooms using paranormal means and then write/draw down the answer using normal means.

I'd much rather transmit between the rooms using radio or by sending a convenional letter and then use my paranormal abilities to write/draw the answer into the answer sheet!

I call it telescribesis

 

[ChristineR]

Explainations

Two people can train themselves to count silently together. This takes a few weeks, but hey, we're talking about a lot of money here.

First round:

The tester flips the card over. She (sender) stares for a bit, then says "sending." He waits a bit, then guesses (1 in 5 chance) a card. He signals the tester to radio "recieved."

Both parties begin counting.

For the second and subsequent rounds, she signals to say "sending" at a predetermined count. Because the tester will actually have the radio, some slack must be allowed, i.e. interval 1-10 is star, 11-20 is circle, etc.

The coding can be varied according to predetermined but random rules each round. This makes it all but undectectable.

This technique was used to fool early ESP researchers, back when scientists actually thought ESP might work.

Professor, when I read your protocol, I thought good, good, good, BAD, good, good....It really stood out. I was hoping you say something like "Predetermined times? Sure, why not?" It seemed unfair to use THE C WORD (cheat) with someone who was being so polite and reasonable.

Now we move on. How can we best vary the protocol so that it allows your wife sufficient time to get in the right mental state but does not allow her to signal you?

 

[politas]

One thing I would like confirmed is the definition of a "correct" answer. Simply getting the correct number or wavy lines cards is far less remarkable than saying "cards 3, 5 and ten were wavy lines."

 

[TheBoyPaj]

I have no problem with Lothain's suggestion.

Have the wife get into her mental state. When she is ready, transmit "sending". THEN reveal the card to the wife and away she goes.

No information leakage, but flexible to the sender's needs.

Would that be OK with you, Mental Professor?

 

[politas]

Now we move on. How can we best vary the protocol so that it allows your wife sufficient time to get in the right mental state but does not allow her to signal you?

Simply add an intermediate relay with a random delay for the communication of the "received" message. That breaks the timing loop entirely. So the person in the receiving room keys a radio tuned to a different channel than the radio in the sending room, and an intermediate with waits for an amount of time unknown to either party, then keys the radio tuned to the sending room. The range of time periods in the delay stage should be unknown to the applicant and his wife.

All in all, you need three pairs of radios: S -> R, R -> I, I -> S, to completely avoid direct two-way information flow. (Although computers using a chat program with separate channels would do as well.)

 

[NiallM]

I have no problem with Lothain's suggestion.

Have the wife get into her mental state. When she is ready, transmit "sending". THEN reveal the card to the wife and away she goes.

No information leakage, but flexible to the sender's needs.

Would that be OK with you, Mental Professor?

That's a good alternative.

I don't want MP to think that I am in any manner accusing him of cheating, by the way.

As has been ppointed, he seems to be well prepared and has as good an understanding of the Challeng requirements as I've seen in a potential candidate. He also seems willing to do what is necessary to get a test. I hope that he pursues it to an actual test. I also hope that he takes on these suggestions in the spirit intended.

 

[MRC_Hans]

The MP says he needs his wife's signal to indicate just when she feels she is transmitting the best. Thus they want control over exactly when the "sent" signal is transferred. This opens the possibility for the counting scheme. However, it is not too difficult to foil that: The "received" signal from the the MP to his wife can simply be delayed by the supervisers by a random interval. That would disrupt a counting scheme.

So, we have:
1) Card displayed to wife.
2) At her on discretion, wife indicates "sent" signal (through supervisor).
3) Supervisor immidiately transmits "sent" signal.
4) At his own discretion, MP indicates "received" signal.
5) Supervisor waits for a random interval (a random timer can easily be constructed, to indicate a time between 0 and, say, 60 seconds).
6) Supervisor sends "received" signal.

What do you say, Mental Professor? Is something like that acceptable to you? After all, you wouldn't want people to suspect you of cheating .

Hans

ETA: Oh, I see Politas already suggested this.

 

[NobbyNobbs]

Alternatively, find out what the longest time period is that the wife has needed to reach the "sending" state. Make that the standard time period between sendings. In other words, if it takes at most 10 minutes to be in a "sending" state, then even if she reaches that state in 2 minutes, she should continue sending for the next 8. At the end of each ten minute interval, the receiver should announce what he received.

 

[MRC_Hans]

One thing I would like confirmed is the definition of a "correct" answer. Simply getting the correct number or wavy lines cards is far less remarkable than saying "cards 3, 5 and ten were wavy lines."

I am assuming it is direct hits that count, that is, the receiver notes down the received sequence, and it is afterwards compared with the actual sequence.

BTW, there is one fishy thing about your opening post, Mental Professor (don't take this personally, remember, we are just conditioned to suspect foul play). You are talking about knowing which cards are already taken. Consider this:

If the cards come in random order, and you have no knowledge of which cards come up (that is your ability does not exist), this will not change your statistical chances of getting hits.

If you think you know which cards have been taken (but are wrong), it may actually reduce your chances, because, while all sequences are possible, you will be reducing your choice of sequences.

Finally, if your knowledge of which cards have been taken is real, it will aid you in hitting the last ones, but then you do have the ability, so it will not invalidate your result.

This is a test to see which of the following positions is true; The position of you that you have the ability, and that of the JREF that you don't.

Hans

 

[Lothian]

I have no problem with Lothain's suggestion.

Have the wife get into her mental state. When she is ready, transmit "sending". THEN reveal the card to the wife and away she goes.

No information leakage, but flexible to the sender's needs.

Would that be OK with you, Mental Professor?

Thanks, but it wasn’t my suggestion. I was merely restating what I understood the first post to say.

When my wife states that she is ready, a fourth observer will radio the word “sending” to a fifth observer in the room where I am located. The third observer will then turn over the first symbol and place it on the other side of the tray.

 

[petre]

Well, I'd think that's enough information to submit a preliminary protocol. As the professor seems well-reasoned, I do hope he'll take the suggestions (and objections) as they help they are intended, rather than any specific attack on his character. Good luck, and I look forward to seeing dialoge with JREF.

 

[Mr. Scott]

Me Cheat?

At this point, Mental Professor, I have to suspect you of what I call "honest lying." That's when you're trying to pull off a lie, but have a hard time doing it when asked a direct question, so you try to find ways of lying without "really" lying.

Nailed it, porch!

When Mental Professor turned the idea of cheating on the test into a joke about cheating on his wife, it was as if all the needles on a lie detector went off the chart.

I think NiallM guessed it. Some strategy like 10 seconds delay for card type one, 15 for card type two, etc. That would also account for good but not perfect accuracy.

The excess detail in the initial protocol was a red flag to me. Sometimes, hidden in the preparations to prevent cheating, are the clues to how the cheating will be done.

For example, a mentalist might insist that he stand back-to-back with his ESP receiver, pressing backs together so there is no possible way they could turn and look at each other's cards. But doing so allows them to communicate with subtle back twitches. Ergo the protocol detail said to prevent cheating actually contains the means to cheat.

Mental Professor: Prove us wrong! Rush in your application and claim your million!