• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Telepathy?

Bill Thompson 75 said:
Doesn't the faster-than-the-speed-of-light barrier only apply to objects with mass?
Click to expand...


I'm no physicist, but I believe that Special Relativity says C is the maximum speed at which information can travel.

Perhaps someone more knowledgeable than I can explain further or how quantum entanglement fits in...
 
Bill Thompson 75 said:
Doesn't the faster-than-the-speed-of-light barrier only apply to objects with mass?
Click to expand...

No. Light has no rest mass, but you don't see light going faster than light.

AdMan said:
Perhaps someone more knowledgeable than I can explain further or how quantum entanglement fits in...
Click to expand...

I'm not particularly knowledgeable in physics, but I'm pretty sure you can't actually use quantum entanglement to transmit information.

(And even if you could, how would you get the other entangled particle into the brain of a alien hundreds of light years away?)
 
Last edited:
Johnny Brant said:
Is telepathy magic or simply an undeveloped ability that we all have?
Click to expand...

The problem with this question is that magic is a very subjective term. Magic is very ambiguous and what we define as magic is nothing but our perception of the universe. For example, if the technologies we have today magically existed in the 17 or 18 century, we would think that those technologies work by magic because we think it is impossible for such thing to happen. However, this is nothing but our ignorance. Our modern day knowledge tells us that these technologies don't work by magic, but via electromagnetic fields, etc.

To answer your question, I would have to say that maybe somewhere in the future telepathy may be considered normal (If it exists)
 
Musibrique said:
The problem with this question is that magic is a very subjective term. Magic is very ambiguous and what we define as magic is nothing but our perception of the universe. For example, if the technologies we have today magically existed in the 17 or 18 century, we would think that those technologies work by magic because we think it is impossible for such thing to happen. However, this is nothing but our ignorance. Our modern day knowledge tells us that these technologies don't work by magic, but via electromagnetic fields, etc.

To answer your question, I would have to say that maybe somewhere in the future telepathy may be considered normal (If it exists)
Click to expand...

I'm in the seriously doubting it category, but technologically assisted telepathy seems like a remote possibility. PET scans that can determine which part of the brain are firing could even now be used to implement a simple form of telepathy. Guy A does something that activates area 1 of his brain. That information is transferred to Guy B. Guy B might be said to have received a message telepathically from Guy A and this might be expanded further. Show Guy A a picture of a naked woman, transmit information about which sections of Guy A's brain are active and Guy B might be able to deduce what Guy A is looking at.
 
davefoc said:
I'm in the seriously doubting it category, but technologically assisted telepathy seems like a remote possibility. PET scans that can determine which part of the brain are firing could even now be used to implement a simple form of telepathy. Guy A does something that activates area 1 of his brain. That information is transferred to Guy B. Guy B might be said to have received a message telepathically from Guy A and this might be expanded further. Show Guy A a picture of a naked woman, transmit information about which sections of Guy A's brain are active and Guy B might be able to deduce what Guy A is looking at.
Click to expand...

Interesting :rolleyes:

Do you know any studies regarding about this? I would much appreciate it.
 
Musibrique said:
Do you know any studies regarding about this? I would much appreciate it.
Click to expand...


You mean using something like an fMRI to transmit information from one individual to another? I am not aware of anything like that (and keep in mind, these sort of things would still be limited by technology and physics, so the speed of that transfer would still be limited by the speed of light between points).

However, here are some links to our first few baby steps in at least electronically recording information in the brain.

http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2011/09/22/brain-movies/

http://gizmodo.com/5922208/scientists-invent-mind+reading-system-that-lets-you-type-with-your-brain

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/409705/mind-reading-with-functional-mri/

Not that we are carrying fMRI machines in our pockets or attached to our ballcaps...
 
fuelair said:
We are discussing them - you are just not happy with how. You want a discussion that must assume telepathy is real. There is ZERO evidence for it being real, so discussion is limited to that point.

We do not randomly discuss , for example, "what would it be like if ghosts were all around us and we could see them faintly!" because that does not lead to any intelligent thinking or bring up any new knowledge to any of us. It is more the type of question, as is the OP, that an aspiring Science Fiction author without much knowledge or skill might throw out fishing for free story ideas (which would be worth roughtly their cost).

And again, if you read some of the threads in science, you would hopefully see many good - and some bad- examples.:)
Click to expand...

So how do you go about gaining the necessary knowledge and skill to ask questions that lead to "intelligent thinking and new knowledge"?
 
fuelair said:
You are not going to like this, but: we do not like to say that science knows things. Scientists tend to, but.... AND science does not say "x does not exist", it says "no evidence of any kind for the existence of X has been found to exist". To non-scientists, these apparently seem to mean the same thing. They do not and scientists know the difference. With no offence, you need to learn that difference.
Click to expand...

But when it comes to actual practical matters, they're treated as the same. We don't go around acting like telepathy might exist just because we can't say "it doesn't exist" scientifically. In other words, when it comes to informing how we should act, "no evidence of any kind for the existence of X has been found to exist" and "x does not exist" might as well be the same thing.
 
Last edited:
My understanding of the etymology of "telepathy" is that it combines Greek roots meaning "distance" and "feeling" (often "suffering" in a medical context- hence pathology , I imagine.) Sympathy. Homoeop...well, maybe not.

Now I recall suffering on a frosty night trying to find (by naked eye) the Andromeda Nebula - and feeling rather pleased when I finally succeeded. So yes, in the interstellar (even intergalactic) context, telepathy does exist.

Shame it only works one way, but we have an actual universe, with actual galaxies.
And it's all free. Let's not be greedy.
 
Bill Thompson 75 said:
Doesn't the faster-than-the-speed-of-light barrier only apply to objects with mass?

Given the following from Space.com:

"Dark energy is the name given to an unexplained force that is drawing galaxies away from each other, against the pull of gravity, at an accelerated pace.
Dark energy is a bit like anti-gravity. Where gravity pulls things together at the more local level, dark energy tugs them apart on the grander scale.
Its existence isn't proven, but dark energy is many scientists' best guess to explain the confusing observation that the universe's expansion is speeding up. Experts still don't know what's driving this force, but the quest to learn more about dark energy is one of cosmologists' top priorities."

What is the difference between dark energy and telepathic energy?
Click to expand...

Silly question, given that you don't know the answer to the first part, and have had ample evidence of the non existence of the second.

What is the difference between talking squid and unicornes? Should I expect that you don't bother to answer in this thread as in previous ones?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom