Has remote viewing already been tested?

[qII]

A Compilation of Con Tricks
Whereas earlier magicians such as Houdini, Maskelyne and Goldstone had reluctantly admitted that some mediumship was indeed genuine, Randi has exhibited an almost fanatical dislike and used unprecedented tactics to deny the existence of any paranormal occurrences. His first book contained an appalling catalogue of misrepresentations, bogus media articles, deceptive accounts of sham duplications and outright fabrications: comparing his accounts with those of the researchers and psychics he maligns, it seems he either quotes fabricated stories from other sources (very often his own friends) or makes them up himself.

http://www.cfpf.org.uk/articles/background/nicholls.html

It seems like most of them are fabricators. CFLarson is a liar. rolfe as I pointed out lies about acupuncture.

 

[scotth]

It could be explained somehow using quantum physics as no one is sure how the brain really works and quantum mechanics is still in its infancy.

Quantum mechanics is certainly not still in its infancy.

I don't think even think you would try insinuate that quantum chromo dynamics (the study of nuclear physics) would be involved, That would leave quantum electrodynamics to be considered. QCD would be hard pressed to be put into service for RV anyway, as the forces it describes can only act at distances on the scale of an atomic nucleus.

Quantum electrodynamics covers every known phenomena save for gravity, and what happens at the nucleus of atoms. That includes everything we know about light, electricity, magnetism, chemistry, etc, etc.

It is without questions the most precise and thoroughly tested theory every devised by man. It is difficult to overstate the degree of confidence that the physics community has in this theory.

And also, without question, there is no room for a mechanism that would permit Remote Viewing within QED.

There are 4 know forces.
The strong and weak nuclear (covered by QCD)
The Electromagnetic, covered by QED
And Gravity explained by relativity.

RV cannot be explained with any of the known forces. Period.

If RV exists, it does so with a force that is not known to physics.

The 4 forces we know about, handily describe all the physical processes that we KNOW to exist.

It is time for the woo-tards to leave quantum mechanics out of their list of possible suspects when it comes to psi explanations. The only reason it is brought up, is because the speaker, and usually the listener don't know much more about it than its name and a couple of its buzzwords.

For the record, zero point energy is part and parcel of QED. It isn't useful for explaining woo either.

In summary:
Known physics positively excludes the possibility of RV. If RV is ever shown to actually function, it will absolutely require a completely new branch of physics to understand its mechanism.

 

[jackmott]

Only one of my doubts addressed.

if we presume for a moment that paranormal activities are not real, then those promoting them would have only one way to address their failure at the randi challenge, to slander him.

so at best its 50/50, believe him or believe them, who knows. one way to find out, apply for the prize. you have nothing to lose.

 

[jackmott]

so what has homeopathy done for you?

can we arrange a testable demonstration of its effectiveness?

"My attitude to RV is much more hard line, simply because RV if true would cut across so much of well tested science,
(and everyday experience)."

REPLY: That is also true, it destroyed my perception of the world as i know and understand it.

**********************************************

I know exactly what this guy is saying. homeopathy has destroyed much of my world view also.

Wild, exciting.

 

[qII]

With the help of his assistant, Matthew Smith, he did four experiments with Jaytee, two in June and two in December 1995, and in all of them Jaytee went to the window to wait for Pam when she was indeed on the way home. As in my own experiments, he sometimes went to the window at other times, for example to bark at passing cats, but he was at the window far more when Pam was on her way home than when she was not. In the three experiments Wiseman did in Pam's parents' flat, Jaytee was at the window an average of 4% of the time during the main period of Pam's absence, and 78% of the time when she was on the way home. This difference was statistically significant. When Wiseman's data were plotted on graphs, they showed essentially the same pattern as my own. In other words Wiseman replicated my own results.

http://www.sheldrake.org/controversies/wiseman.html

My God, these skeptic scumbags are sure good at lying.

 

[qII]

if we presume for a moment that paranormal activities are not real, then those promoting them would have only one way to address their failure at the randi challenge, to slander him.

so at best its 50/50, believe him or believe them, who knows. one way to find out, apply for the prize. you have nothing to lose.

jackmott,

what, are you stupid?

the whole thing is a charade.

 

[Nyarlathotep]

A Compilation of Con Tricks
Whereas earlier magicians such as Houdini, Maskelyne and Goldstone had reluctantly admitted that some mediumship was indeed genuine

Bullpuckey. A misrepresentation at best. I do not know about the other two but though Houdini may have started out thinking that there was something to mediums, his investigations led him to conclude it was all a sham. Rather the opposite of the way you make it sound.

Read his own writings if you care to. A copy of his "A Magician Among the Spirits" ought to be easily available to you.

 

[jackmott]

jackmott,

what, are you stupid?

the whole thing is a charade.

I paypal either of you the postage and paper costs to send in applications and document your experience with the process here to prove that point.

So far the only evidence I have is from people who may well have obvious reasons to lie about Randi.

or I'll offer my own $100 challenege if you like. Anything I feel capable of testing properly. Homeopathy shouldn't be a problem.

 

[jackmott]

The dog could be familiar with its owners patterns, its not made clear how this experiment was done. was it double blind? was someone in the house in contact with the owner who knew when she was on the way home?

all questions that could easily be answerd by those who did the study, and retested if need be

With the help of his assistant, Matthew Smith, he did four experiments with Jaytee, two in June and two in December 1995, and in all of them Jaytee went to the window to wait for Pam when she was indeed on the way home. As in my own experiments, he sometimes went to the window at other times, for example to bark at passing cats, but he was at the window far more when Pam was on her way home than when she was not. In the three experiments Wiseman did in Pam's parents' flat, Jaytee was at the window an average of 4% of the time during the main period of Pam's absence, and 78% of the time when she was on the way home. This difference was statistically significant. When Wiseman's data were plotted on graphs, they showed essentially the same pattern as my own. In other words Wiseman replicated my own results.

http://www.sheldrake.org/controversies/wiseman.html

My God, these skeptic scumbags are sure good at lying.

 

[Psiload]

From the same site as above.
That reminds me of the junk you see on infomercials that come with a "certificate of authenticity", which is only as good as the people backing it. My trash collector could give me something he'd picked up from another house and provide me with a "certificate of authenticity". Doesn't mean a thing. It'd still be trash.

The American Association of Professional Psychic's code of conduct must condone trolling Usenet teen forums offering "psychic counselling", because he was caught doing just that on a few occassions.

 

[specious_reasons]

Bullpuckey. A misrepresentation at best. I do not know about the other two but though Houdini may have started out thinking that there was something to mediums, his investigations led him to conclude it was all a sham. Rather the opposite of the way you make it sound.

Read his own writings if you care to. A copy of his "A Magician Among the Spirits" ought to be easily available to you.

IIRC, it can be found in Project Gutenberg.

No, wait, this one is:
Miracle Mongers, An Expose', The
http://www.gutenberg.net/etext/435

From the introduction of the book:

Much has been written about the feats of
miracle-mongers, and not a little in the way
of explaining them. Chaucer was by no means
the first to turn shrewd eyes upon wonder-
workers and show the clay feet of these popular
idols. And since his time innumerable
marvels, held to be supernatural, have been
exposed for the tricks they were.

My business has given me an intimate
knowledge of stage illusions, together
with many years of experience among show
people of all types. My familiarity with the
former, and what I have learned of the
psychology of the latter, has placed me at a
certain advantage in uncovering the natural
explanation of feats that to the ignorant have
seemed supernatural.

 

[qII]

For the record, zero point energy is part and parcel of QED. It isn't useful for explaining woo either.

PROVE IT.

 

[jackmott]

PROVE IT.

if we prove that will u prove that homepathy is useful?

 

[qII]

100,000 european medical doctors know that it works.

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=1870417603#post1870417603

 

[scotth]

PROVE IT.

Zero point energy is energy and nothing more. The postulation of zero point energy falls out of application of the uncertainty principal. Most physicist don't think it physically exists, but is nothing more than an mathmatical artifact.

If it does exist, there isn't a way to exact useful energy from it, even in theory.

As far as using it to explain psi, etc... The idea that empty space may have a (vast) energy content is in no way useful for explaining the inexplicable transfer of information across large distances.

The concept that magnets attract each other is precisely as useful.

 

[qII]

Zero point energy is energy and nothing more. The postulation of zero point energy falls out of application of the uncertainty principal. Most physicist don't think it physically exists, but is nothing more than an mathmatical artifact.

If it does exist, there isn't a way to exact useful energy from it, even in theory.

As far as using it to explain psi, etc... The idea that empty space may have a (vast) energy content is in no way useful for explaining the inexplicable transfer of information across large distances.

The concept that magnets attract each other is precisely as useful.

you have no idea what you are talking about. quit trying to fake it.

 

[pgwenthold]

Zero point energy is energy and nothing more. The postulation of zero point energy falls out of application of the uncertainty principal. Most physicist don't think it physically exists, but is nothing more than an mathmatical artifact.

How do they explain kinetic isotope effects?

A common explanation is the difference in zpe between isotopomers (specifically in the reaction coordinate) that lead to different energy differences between the reactants and transition state of a chemical reaction.

KIEs are a consequences of differences in zero point energies.

 

[scotth]

How do they explain kinetic isotope effects?

A common explanation is the difference in zpe between isotopomers (specifically in the reaction coordinate) that lead to different energy differences between the reactants and transition state of a chemical reaction.

KIEs are a consequences of differences in zero point energies.

zpe is (possibly) a property of SPACE, not matter.

That makes no sense at all.

Please find me a degreed phsycist and/or chemist that thinks zpe has anything to do with KIE.

Edited to add... and what does that have to do with psi?

Further edited to add, I have found some references that discuss zero point energy in this context.... they are not talking about the same thing as "the zero point energy" of empty space that is so often blathered about in the psi context. Not the same thing at all.

 

[scotth]

you have no idea what you are talking about. quit trying to fake it.

Finally reached the ignore threshold. I should have done that days ago in retrospect.

 

[pgwenthold]

zpe is (possibly) a property of SPACE, not matter.

Yes and no. ZPE is a property of space _and_ matter.

That makes no sense at all.

Please find me a degreed phsycist and/or chemist that thinks zpe has anything to do with KIE.

Me.

Edited to add... and what does that have to do with psi?

Nothing, I would think. You'd have to ask someone who believes in that crap.

Further edited to add, I have found some references that discuss zero point energy in this context.... they are not talking about the same thing as "the zero point energy" of empty space that is so often blathered about in the psi context. Not the same thing at all.

Actually, they should be the same thing. It's just the difference between the ZPE of a particle/molecule/vibration and the ZPE of a vacuum.

If you want to talk about the ZPE of a vacuum, then you should make sure that is what you mean. OTOH, from what I have found, I don't see any reason to think that the ZPE of a vacuum is not real. Most hits for "zero point energy of a vacuum" bring up woo-woo sites, but there is this Scientific American summary

http://www.padrak.com/ine/ZPESCIAM.html

The effect of vacuum ZPE has been observed but the energy is so low that there isn't anything there. OTOH, this is a little older, so I can't say what is the modern view. I think the conclusion is reasonable, though. The physics is there to say there is a ZPE of a vacuum, it's effects have been measured, but it's small.