• 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

Loss Leader said:
I had initially suggested the entire deck of 52 at an exact time of his choosing, concentrating on each for five seconds per card. He'd need to get 10 right to warrant further testing.

If he'd think he'd be stronger at remote viewing, I'll put five cards in an envelope and keep it for however long he wants. In that case, 4 out of 5 would be impressive enough to repeat the test.
Click to expand...

Wait, 4 out of 5...?

Each one has a suit and number, out of 52 possibilities.

ANY correct cards should be a positive result... No?
 
dann said:
No, never, but that's mainly because I know that that's something that nobody can feel, however much they imagine that they can.

Anybody who can sense being stalked will look in the direction of a stalker. It takes a conscious, deliberate effort not to do so (i.e. in order to fool the stalker by giving him/her/it the impression that the prey/stalkee is unaware of being stalked). But, of course, your "sense" means sense telepathically, and that never happens!

Probably not. It would depend on the time lapse: If on average people tend to cast a glance over their shoulder once every ten minutes or so, thus discovering that somebody is watching them, then of course test situations that lasted more than ten minutes would, on average, produce the result you claim: more often than not! Tests that lasted fewer than ten minutes would, on average, not.

Yes, that's one of the many reasons why animals have eyes, ears, noses and other senses (for instance of vibrations or electrical fields)! :)
However, even though a pig would be much more likely to escape a predator if it had wings and were able to take to the air, that still doesn't mean that pigs can fly!
You would stand a better chance if you go for the Pigasus Award (Wikipedia).
Click to expand...

How might one apply the Placebo Effect to that way of thinking?
 
May I know anything more about Loss Leader, so that I might focus my energy *giggle* in a specific direction?

Where are you, Loss Leader, in the world? Are you male or female?

Might I ask for silent observation during the test?
 
King of the Americas said:
How does mondays and fridays 7-9'ish work for you?
Click to expand...


How about this:

This Monday, October 9, at 7:30 p.m. Eastern, I will take a new deck of cards, shuffle them seven times, pick a card and concentrate on that card for one minute - from 7:30 to 7:31. I will then put that card back in the deck, reshuffle all the cards, pick another at random, and concentrate on it from 7:32 to 7:33 pm Eastern.

I will repeat this process ten times - each time using the full deck so that it's possible for a card to come up twice.

The first card will be from 7:00 to 7:01 pm Eastern
7:02 to 7:03
7:04 to 7:05
7:06 to 7:07
7:08 to 7:09
7:10 to 7:11
7:11 to 7:12
7:13 to 7:14
7:15 to 7:16
7:17 to 7:17

There will be a full minute between each card.

At 7:30 p.m. Eastern, I will post the MD5 hash on this thread. Then you post your results. I will then reveal the cards and compare your answer.

Out of 10, you would have to get 8 correct to warrant further testing. A correct card must be exactly the same number and suit.

King of the Americas said:
May I know anything more about Loss Leader, so that I might focus my energy *giggle* in a specific direction?

Where are you, Loss Leader, in the world? Are you male or female?

Might I ask for silent observation during the test?
Click to expand...


I am in Boca Raton, Florida. I'm a 47 year-old man. Let me know what else you want to know.

I don't know what "silent observation" means.
 
Loss Leader said:
How about this:

This Monday, October 9, at 7:30 p.m. Eastern, I will take a new deck of cards, shuffle them seven times, pick a card and concentrate on that card for one minute - from 7:30 to 7:31. I will then put that card back in the deck, reshuffle all the cards, pick another at random, and concentrate on it from 7:32 to 7:33 pm Eastern.

I will repeat this process ten times - each time using the full deck so that it's possible for a card to come up twice.

The first card will be from 7:00 to 7:01 pm Eastern
7:02 to 7:03
7:04 to 7:05
7:06 to 7:07
7:08 to 7:09
7:10 to 7:11
7:11 to 7:12
7:13 to 7:14
7:15 to 7:16
7:17 to 7:17

There will be a full minute between each card.

At 7:30 p.m. Eastern, I will post the MD5 hash on this thread. Then you post your results. I will then reveal the cards and compare your answer.

Out of 10, you would have to get 8 correct to warrant further testing. A correct card must be exactly the same number and suit.




I am in Boca Raton, Florida. I'm a 47 year-old man. Let me know what else you want to know.

I don't know what "silent observation" means.
Click to expand...

This is great. Loss Leader has proposed a very specific protocol and King of the Americas is stepping up to give it a try. Let's all cheer on both of them!
 
Startz said:
This is great. Loss Leader has proposed a very specific protocol and King of the Americas is stepping up to give it a try. Let's all cheer on both of them!
Click to expand...


KotA has to agree that a positive result is only 8 correct out of 10 and nothing less.

If he thinks that's not something he can do with 90% confidence, we'll redesign the test.
 
Loss Leader said:
How about this:

This Monday, October 9, at 7:30 p.m. Eastern, I will take a new deck of cards, shuffle them seven times, pick a card and concentrate on that card for one minute - from 7:30 to 7:31. I will then put that card back in the deck, reshuffle all the cards, pick another at random, and concentrate on it from 7:32 to 7:33 pm Eastern.

I will repeat this process ten times - each time using the full deck so that it's possible for a card to come up twice.

The first card will be from 7:00 to 7:01 pm Eastern
7:02 to 7:03
7:04 to 7:05
7:06 to 7:07
7:08 to 7:09
7:10 to 7:11
7:11 to 7:12
7:13 to 7:14
7:15 to 7:16
7:17 to 7:17

There will be a full minute between each card.

At 7:30 p.m. Eastern, I will post the MD5 hash on this thread. Then you post your results. I will then reveal the cards and compare your answer.

Out of 10, you would have to get 8 correct to warrant further testing. A correct card must be exactly the same number and suit.




I am in Boca Raton, Florida. I'm a 47 year-old man. Let me know what else you want to know.

I don't know what "silent observation" means.
Click to expand...

Not enough time to focus...

I propose 5 minutes on each card, ten minute break, another card. We'll can do 5 cards per day? Maybe just three, from the 52 card shuffled deck, that should be random enough.

Try to 'send' *giggle* the cards identification to a male in Denton Texas.

I'm central time, so I'll check in here, at this thread before 8. Shall we do this via a separate thread?
 
King of the Americas said:
Not enough time to focus...

I propose 5 minutes on each card, ten minute break, another card. We'll can do 5 cards per day? Maybe just three, from the 52 card shuffled deck, that should be random enough.

Try to 'send' *giggle* the cards identification to a male in Denton Texas.

I'm central time, so I'll check in here, at this thread before 8. Shall we do this via a separate thread?
Click to expand...

I think the odds of getting 3 or more out of ten cards is just under 1/1000. Probably good enough for this kind of demonstration.
 
Loss Leader said:
KotA has to agree that a positive result is only 8 correct out of 10 and nothing less.

If he thinks that's not something he can do with 90% confidence, we'll redesign the test.
Click to expand...

WHAT?

If telepathy were basketball, I am claiming that I can make a free throw, maybe even several from further away.

I am NOT claiming perfect accuracy, or even 90%.

Given the odds of guessing, I'd say more than one correct response throughout this test, would be a positive result.
 
King of the Americas said:
Given the odds of guessing, I'd say more than one correct response throughout this test, would be a positive result.
Click to expand...


If you think you can only get two cards correct out of ten chances, then we're going to have to completely redesign the test.

By pure chance, there's something like a 20% chance that you get at least one right. Two cards would be well within the expected deviation from one.

You would have to do dozens of trials in order to show statistical significance for an effect that small.

I don't think I have the time to do all of those trials.

Let's see wah jt512 says about the statistics of the matter.


ETA: I've sent a PM to jt512 for help with the math.
 
Last edited:
The probability of getting two or more is about 1.6 percent. It would probably be sufficient to run the test twice, requiring a success on each, to get a pretty clear signal.

But I think we need KotA to tell us what test he thinks he could pass.
 
King,

Back when the Forum was something of a discussion board for Randi's test, there was a long history of folks showing up claiming they wanted to be tested, pretty much agreeing to a test, and then changing the terms each time a test was imminent. So far, you've seemed pretty happy with the idea of doing a test. I hope you won't turn out to be like the many previous posters.
 
Dave Rogers said:
No. If LL picks 5 cards at random and you pick 5 cards at random, there's better than a 25% chance that one of them will be the same.

Dave
Click to expand...

Actually, it may be much better.

First, are the second 5 cards picked with replacement (returning the card picked to the deck) or without replacement?

If the pick is with replacement, then every time a card is picked, the probability that it is not one of the specified 5 cards is 47/52.

The odds of doing this 5 times successfully is (47/52)5, or about 0.60.

So the odds of picking at least one of the specified 5 cards is about 1.0 - 0.60 = 0.40, a 40% chance.

If the pick is done without replacement, then the probabilities are:

Card 1: 47/52 (of 52 cards, 47 are not in the specified set)

Card 2: 46/51 (of 51 cards, 46 are not in the specified set)

Card 3: 45/50 (of 50 cards, 45 are not in the specified set)

Card 4: 44/49 ...

Card 5: 43/48 ...

Then the probability of picking 5 cards not in the specified set is

47/52 x 46/51 x 45/50 x 44/49 x 43/48 = (about) 0.59, or 59%.

So the odds that at least one card in the specified set is picked is 1.0 - 0.59, a 41% chance.

If I've done this right, then there is a 40% or better chance of picking a card in the selected set, with or without replacement.
 
Humots said:
Actually, it may be much better.

First, are the second 5 cards picked with replacement (returning the card picked to the deck) or without replacement?
Click to expand...


I had suggested that I would replace the card and reshuffle the deck between each pick. I suggested doing this ten times over twenty minutes.

KotA wants each card to take 15 minutes, which would make ten trials take two and a half hours. He also wants a hit rate of 20% which would, to my understanding, require far more than 10 trials to confidently distinguish it from chance.

These are huge hurdles. I don't want to force him to do something he doesn't think he can pass. But the test has to be manageable for me.

I would appreciate any input regarding strengthening this protocol.
 
Startz said:
King,

Back when the Forum was something of a discussion board for Randi's test, there was a long history of folks showing up claiming they wanted to be tested, pretty much agreeing to a test, and then changing the terms each time a test was imminent. So far, you've seemed pretty happy with the idea of doing a test. I hope you won't turn out to be like the many previous posters.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your interest, and no worries, I'm good to go.

What's the worsted thing that could happen?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom