• 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.

Human ability to effect machines

WinterMute

Student
W
Joined
Mar 24, 2004
Messages
35
Hi all,

I've been a lurker on this forum for quite some time now. First off I would
like to thank all on this forum. I have learned lots and lots of things
during the past months. Sure there a some threads that have derailed
completely in some sort of flame wars but most of the threads are kept in a
civil manner even when discussing topics like psi that involves both
sceptics and believers. I find these discussions extremely interesting and
productive.

I was a sceptical mind when I first started to come here, but you ppl have
thought me a lot of more things how to present proof and the scientific
model. This goes both for other sceptics here and people who holds a strong
believe in paranormal phenomenon.

Since most of you ppl combined sit on a mountain of knowledge I thought I
ask you a question. I tried to search for this on the forum but couldn't
find anything.

A couple of years back there was an article in a (back then at least)
respected Swedish popular since magazine that talked about humans ability to
affect machines using 'mind power'. Of course they didn't draw any
conclusions that this was true or not but if I recall there were some
respected researchers involved in this matter.

On of the test where contacted like this:
A person sat in front of a computer monitor. The computer was instructed to
simulate coin flips (head and tails) randomly.
The person was to concentrate on either head or tails.
If I recall there was some statistical favour to what the person was
instructed to concentrate on.

Now I'm just wondering if anyone recognize any of this since I would like to
read more like exactly how the test were conducted, outcome and so on. All
links and references are appreciated.

I guess it didn't yield much result as we would have heard about it else and
as a programmer I find the idea impossible. But it would still be
interesting to read more.

Thanks.
 
Welcome, WinterMute!

Do you have any references for the experiment you spoke about? URLs and/or research journals?
 
Hi Zep!
been enjoying your posts in the past :-)

Unfortunate I have no references at all. Been trying to search the net for similar experiments but haven't been able to find anything (yet).

I have been in contact with the magazine in question but they haven't responded (been months). I'll guess I'll have to give them a call if no one here seen it.

If I recall correct one other thing they tired was this:

They had about 5 small battery powered cars in an small arena. These cars had also been programmed to go around in a random pattern. The test subjects then concentrated on a specific spot on the small arena in order to have the cars go there more often then other spots.
 
You're probably thinking of the PEAR experiments. Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research. Their results have been iffy at best, and the best is none too good.

Incidentally, it's "affect," not "effect." This is one of those unpleasantries about English. To affect something is to cause an effect. To effect something is to cause it to exist.
 
WinterMute said:
Hi Zep!
been enjoying your posts in the past :-)

Unfortunate I have no references at all. Been trying to search the net for similar experiments but haven't been able to find anything (yet).

I have been in contact with the magazine in question but they haven't responded (been months). I'll guess I'll have to give them a call if no one here seen it.

If I recall correct one other thing they tired was this:

They had about 5 small battery powered cars in an small arena. These cars had also been programmed to go around in a random pattern. The test subjects then concentrated on a specific spot on the small arena in order to have the cars go there more often then other spots.
Click to expand...
Thanks!

First obvious question up front about the experiment: How did they measure the frequency of visits to "spots" at all?

For example, if it was a big arena and a few small spots, it may have been rare for any cars to pass over a particular spot at all. If small area and big spots, one car could effectively block any other cars from getting to any particular spot, thereby seeming to stick on that spot a lot, or even being pushed there by other cars. Also, there could be statistical significance on how close each spot was to the outside wall and what shape the arena was, assuming the cars usually bounced off the wall.

It's a cute idea and I suspect it is supposed to statistically represent Brownian motion or something, but it sounds like it would not have been REALLY random movement at all. It would have what are known as "artifacts" - effects that arise that are really caused by something in the experiment rather than by the sought phenomenon. And in this case they would probably be quite noticeable.

The problem is that the telekinetic (TK) effect is now believed to be a "weak force"; that is, it can't exert great influences, the effect is probably only seen in statistics. Therefore I would suspect the comparison of "before" and "after" of the car statistics would probably bury any TK effect in random statistical noise and artifacts of the experiment. And any positive results could easily be just another artifact.

But that's just me waffling on. The concept is sound as a means to measure TK, but the toy cars are way too crude.

Still, if you can find a reference it would be good!

Edit: speling erar
 
epepke said:
You're probably thinking of the PEAR experiments. Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research. Their results have been iffy at best, and the best is none too good.

Incidentally, it's "affect," not "effect." This is one of those unpleasantries about English. To affect something is to cause an effect. To effect something is to cause it to exist.
Click to expand...
Did PEAR play with toy cars to do this sort of stuff? I don't recall seeing anything in my browse through their literature...but I could easily be wrong. Certainly it seems more controlled that some of the RV stuff they tried!
 
I can immediately see one big problem with the "cars" experiment, but Zep beat me to it. But he's so long-winded, I'll summarize ;)

Because of the shape of the cars, the shape of the arena and other factors, the final position of the cars is not random, but would tend to cluster in preferred patterns. Consciously or subconsciously, the test subjects would begin to recognize those patterns and pick them preferentially.
 
I can immediately see one big problem with the "cars" experiment, but Zep beat me to it. But he's so long-winded, I'll summarize
Click to expand...

Yes me too. Since this is from memory and I don't have the specific article we've have to take that with a grain of salt (exactly how it was conducted).
 
This Man vs. Machine test was mentioned in a disgustingly bad documentary on Discovery Science called ‘Science of the Impossible, Invisible Forces.’
“Can psychics influence computers…? Yes!” and, “Is it possible to travel outside the body and travel in space and time…? Yes!”
According to this educational goldmine it’s also possible to become invisible, walk through walls and fly if we could just learn to harness the power of the mind so that we can travel between higher dimensions.
Apparently scientists say that the reason PSI (and all that stuff) works is because certain people can slip into these other dimensions.
Oh, and that in the future we will be solving all crimes psychically.
Yeah thanks, Discovery.
 
Can psychics influence computers…? Yes!” and, “Is it possible to travel outside the body and travel in space and time…? Yes!”
Click to expand...

I find it strange when Discovery channel waste air-time with such programs. I usually find their programs highly professional and scientific.
Also all these UFO and cover-up stuff that they air which all end with something like "The bottom line is, we don't know if UFOs are ET aliens and if the government is covering it up".
I mean, why bother...

I guess it's popular subjects with the majority of the public and unfortunately money talks.
 
Howdy WinterMute.

Do these computer experiments use a programmed pseudo-random number generator? If so, is someone suggesting that people can affect the operation of the computer to skew the numbers? :eek: :confused:

~~ Paul
 
Hi Paul,

Do these computer experiments use a programmed pseudo-random number generator? If so, is someone suggesting that people can affect the operation of the computer to skew the numbers?
Click to expand...

Yes. As I understood it the goal was to get an increase in for example the number of heads the random generator produced when the subject concentrated on heads. Sound like big woo-woo-ism but the only reason for me to get hold of info regarding this is that I found this magazine to be reliable back when I read it. Again I don't remember the outcome of the tests or what conclusions that were drawn by the article.

I will read more about it from the links suggested and try to see if I can get a copy of the article from the Swedish magazine.
 
Slightly off topic, but i recall hearing a couple of years ago about a technology which involved some form of implant that allowed the control of a mouse pointer by electrical brain impulses. It was hoped to be useful for severely disabled people.

I haven't heard anything more recently nor have a link.
 
Do these computer experiments use a programmed pseudo-random number generator? If so, is someone suggesting that people can affect the operation of the computer to skew the numbers?
Click to expand...

That's what I always wondered when I heard this claim, but apparently some people think the human mind can affect the computer's operation. My idea is to use a program that doesn't set the random seed, so that the "random" numbers, and the resulting number of heads and tails, will always be the same. That way if you run the program and the results are what they are supposed to be there was no effect, if the results are different you know there was some effect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom