• 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.

PK parties

Is it possible to set up an online experiment using a number of webcam users. It is not always possible for people with limited mobility to participate in these things, a web cam party could over come this. Any ideas? Is it even possible to host 20 or so webcams feeding into one site? If so, could anyone point me in the right direction? Thanks.
 
flyboy217 wrote:
How about this: science is mum on the subject of the Schroedinger wavefunction collapse. The evolution of this probabilistic function is not what we observe. Instead, consciousness affects a collapse in a way that we can't even fathom putting into formulae just yet. That is to say, wavefunction collapse DOES in some sense violate known physics. And what causes it? Inanimate matter? No. Only one thing: consciousness.
You misunderstand quantum physics. It is extremely well understood, without consciousness having any effect on it.
 
CurtC said:
You misunderstand quantum physics. It is extremely well understood, without consciousness having any effect on it.

No. The observed collapse of the wave function is not well understood at all. It is merely ignored or given a label. "Observation" itself has not been well defined.
 
McFly:

Try observing something without being conscious. Nigh impossible. Quantum craziness seems to have less to do with the immediate observer being "conscious" than it does with "being observed at all." Which, you know, vastly increases the effect of whatever's going on with those nutty little waves and particles and all.

I don't really know what I'm talking about, try though I might to understand it through the reading of pop science lit. Listen, though! I don't mean to derail nothin, but if you really want to tell if wave function collapse has to do with consciousness, try this:

Go into a room. Set it up for an experiment! Set up all your machines to record exactly what goes on. Flip yer switches, get it all rolling, and leave the damned room.

Come back a year later. See what happened. Then repeat the experiment while you're in the room.

Note: This is NOT the same as Schroedinger's Kitty. We ain't talking about no SEALED room, from which no information can escape. We're talking about whether very, very tiny things can tell if they're being watched by a conscious brain or some unconscious metal thingamabobber.

Just a suggestion!

A Word on The Laws of Physics: You know, we're mostly intelligent folks, here. It's okay to use dialectical short-hand when talking. Let's assume we know basic definitions.

But I didn't say "Known Laws of Physics" for a very decent reason. An "unknown law" will not account for things which do not happen. "People teleport!" "Violins copulate!" "Spoons bend!" We know people don't teleport and violins don't copulate and spoons don't bend because they're not ruled by "unknown laws:" They're ruled by the ones we already understand.

Of course there are "unknown laws." Or, at least, there probably are. Or, who knows? Maybe there aren't. I'm just a journalist.

But those "unknown laws" would have to cover heretofore unsuspected objects, behaving in otherwise inexplicable ways. We know about metal. We can account for every little damned thing it does.

Controversially, I say--ditto brains!

Now, I know that, subjectively, there are a lot of things that brains do that we cannot fathom. Consciousness, for example. We cannot figure out why the subjective experience of consciousness is allowed for by the little machinations of brain tissues.

But!

BUT!

The key, here, is "subjective." The OBJECTIVE behaviour of a brain is nothing very strange. Complicated, yessir--complicated in the extreme. But the processes taking place in a brain are not, physically, especially mind-blowing. There's just a great many of them, and they happen very quickly. You dig?

That's all I'm saying. Bending a spoon or a bar or something would require something OBJECTIVELY EXTRAORDINARY to be happening, physically, in and around a brain. And brains don't do that. All of their mystery is tied up in the subjective experience they present to their owners.

Or, I could put this in question form. Do you suppose that what a brain does, physically, when thinking about bending a spoon, is all that different from what a brain does, physically, when it thinks about what it's going to order for dessert at The Cheesecake Factory?

I mean, who knows, it could be so. Maybe, as you hint, the brain sends out a hidden message (electrical? chemical? Swahili?) to all the aimless warmth in a room and says, "Hey there! Bend that damned spoon over there!" and this heat understands such a message and makes a beeline for said silverware (though how it can transport itself--what the cognitive mobility of heat might be--
is, maybe, debatable). Could be. And if that's the case, I'd like to see it. Which brings us to...

Lucianarchy. Yar, set something like that up. That'd be grand. You'd need a buttload of cameras, though, to make sure every piece of silverware stays on screen the entire time. And you'd have to get said silverware by way of mail, sealed in some interesting and distinct and non-reproducable way, by a skeptic, and open it on-camera at the beginning of the festivities.

Can you pull that sort of thing together? Love to help.

Faithfully Nude,
- B
 
Luci:

First off, _Dialer Proof Dreams_ is very cool, though the sales training at the beginning is frightening--used to be in sales, they give that sort of speech every freaking morning. It's horrible. It still haunts my dreams.

Stoner-techno's grand, though it's hard to find good examples. I just found a long-missing copy of Afro Celt Soundsystem's third album, forgot how much I loved it. Ever heard? You'd like.

Anyhoo, gave the test a test. Ran it ten times when I was out of the room, or viewing other webpages. Then I ran it ten times while actually attempting to move the silly little bar to the right, using all those old New Age techniques that I ran from in disgrace around my fourteenth birthday.

The results?

While Trying:

+16*
-12
0*
-3
+18*
+23*
-14
-19
+10*
-20

Not Trying:

-23
-13
-4
+14*
+10
+13*
+16*
+5*
-9
-16

The reason you see all those little asterisks is this: The browser window was maximized during those tests. It was minimized, and in the background, during all the others.

Now, I don't believe in PK, 'cause, you know, no good reasonably objective evidence has been presented to me, and all that.

But!

Even if there were such a thing, and I believed in it, this test is utter ◊◊◊◊◊.

Because the prospective PKer is trying to move a line, which isn't a line at all. It's a bunch of different colored pixels.

But that's not it at all, either. It's actually supposedly hooked up to some object undergoing random radioactive decay, location undisclosed. WTF? The information is being produced elsewhere, and the claimant isn't even trying to, uh, psychically impact the causitive agent of what's appearing on the screen.

Is this, really, the best we can do?

Once again, you're a fine artist--your music is great. You're just a little crazy, is the thing.

mfdg;kfjs,
- B
 
LettristLoon said:

Now, I don't believe in PK, 'cause, you know, no good reasonably objective evidence has been presented to me, and all that.

But!

Even if there were such a thing, and I believed in it, this test is utter s**te.

Because the prospective PKer is trying to move a line, which isn't a line at all. It's a bunch of different colored pixels.

But that's not it at all, either. It's actually supposedly hooked up to some object undergoing random radioactive decay, location undisclosed. WTF? The information is being produced elsewhere, and the claimant isn't even trying to, uh, psychically impact the causitive agent of what's appearing on the screen.


- B

I agree. Weird, uh? How come I can repeatedly swing it though? Luck? I believe that Time will tell.
 
LettristLoon said:
Luci:
...
Because the prospective PKer is trying to move a line, which isn't a line at all. It's a bunch of different colored pixels.

But that's not it at all, either. It's actually supposedly hooked up to some object undergoing random radioactive decay, location undisclosed. WTF? The information is being produced elsewhere, and the claimant isn't even trying to, uh, psychically impact the causitive agent of what's appearing on the screen.

Is this, really, the best we can do?

Once again, you're a fine artist--your music is great. You're just a little crazy, is the thing.

mfdg;kfjs,
- B

I am sad to see that this thread has degenerated into utter nonsense.

Let me try to rephrase it one last time, after which I will (do my best to) refrain from saying more here: before trying to give an explanation for any purported phenomenon, debunking the theory, and then making it sound even more silly, let the data for that experiment roll in. Then, analyze the data, and work on debunking THAT. If it generates no positive data, you can merrily rejoice with your "BUT! OMGWTF!" parties. I'll even join you. If it does produce data, and we can't explain that away just yet, we'll go from there (independenly verify it, re-run it, etc.)

I know it's hard to refrain from attaching ridiculous theories to these experiments. After all, how would you describe such an experiment as RPKP or spoon-bending other than "weird?" I feel the same. And I'm sure you can make the argument that "Oh, I'm just trying to explain why this isn't even a useful test of PK." But you have no ownership in it! Sit back, laugh at them, and let them do their thing. When the data are in, let's discuss matters of protocol, etc.

Or put it this way. If they do generate a positive outcome, what's at least one claim they might be able to make? "The colored pixels moved more to the right when people intended it to." That in itself is strange, without having to attack the process of how the pixels relate to the radioactive decay. And if, for some very strange reason, this positive outcome is reached? What's the most useful thing to do (after becoming thoroughly exhausted trying to debunk it, and failing in this case)? Explain it.

Anyway, my skull is throbbing from a terrible, terrible cold. Feel free to argue with anything I've said here, but... I will no longer argue with you why such silly-sounding experiments would produce results until such time as they do (or do not) produce them. Spoons included.
 
*sigh*. You have as much right to post whatever you like as anyone. Sorry :)

Just sad to see my thread go out this way.
 
It's all good, flyboy, all good.

As Terrence McKenna used to say; "It's the thinking that causes change."
 
LettristLoon said:

Because the prospective PKer is trying to move a line, which isn't a line at all. It's a bunch of different colored pixels.

Taken from another view (the Decision Augementation Theory), I believe it isn't about moving the actual pixels, per say, but subconsciously judiciously selecting (ie using 'psi') the best time to click "Start" that will select the data with a large amount of 1's, say, that will end up moving the line to the right.
 
Right.

Or, also, weirdly, it seems as though positive results are obtained only when the broswer window stays open. That could be a weird coincidence, though. Check it out.

- B
 
Try bending a 3/8" rod of 7075-T6 aluminum alloy.

Then try bending a 3/8" rod of 5056-0 aluminum alloy of the same length.

Until the 5056 yields, they'll feel identical. After that point, the 5056 will work harden, especially after several "flexes", whereas you need to be pretty strong to get the 7075-T6 rod to yield at all (although I would've suggested something slightly thicker than 3/8" and/or shorter than 12").

FWIW.

BTW: If Targ is an experienced conjurer, then he is also quite capable of actually applying trickery in his experiments, even though he claims to be safeguarding against it.
 
LettristLoon said:
O McFly, you weren't present, you don't know that the spoons weren't ever tampered with, that the stories from the parties aren't spun by psychic spin doctors. All that was suggested is that maybe, maybe, something was done in order to surreptitiously select the spoons.

Which is, of course, more likely than the laws of physics being violated.

Not to say that the spoons weren't bent by psychic means, or whatever, but there you go.

Hey! Have we stopped to consider the mechanics of this thing?

Okay, first off: You got some spoons and forks and whatnot. They're made of metal. Then you've got some men and women and children and whatnot. They're made of all kinds of goo and bone. Right? Right.

Now, goo and bone, whether alive or dead, can move things around by coming into contact with those things and exerting some sort of force upon them. Right? Righteo!

Okay! Now, we're assuming that corpses cannot perform PK. No one has said that--I'm just assuming it. If anyone disagrees, feel free to, you know, disagree.

Right! Well! The difference between a corpse and a living person is something like this: Living people have a pulse, and all sorts of cool electrical/chemical activity going on inside of their bodies. The most interesting thing done by all of this electrical/chemical activity is called "consciousness." It happens in the brain.

Now, presumably, it is the "mind"--a function of the brain--which is performing all of this PK. So!

Basically, what you have, is a bunch of chemicals and a little bit of electricity moving in these erratic patterns inside of a large, mushy organ. PK is the subtle art of getting that stuff--those chemicals and that electricity--to somehow move matter that is not, in fact, touching it.

Somehow, the brain is supposedly the only popular combination of chemicals and electricity on earth capable of doing this sort of thing. Which is odd! Because it's also the only popular combination of chemicals and electricity on earth capable of conceiving of such a thing as PK! Coincidence? Nosir! It's also the only popular combination of chemicals and electricity on earth capable of thinking about how strange it is to be a self-aware combination of chemicals and electricity, which then, nevertheless, goes on to ignore the logical extensions of this idea--namely, that chemicals and electricity, just because they're "aware," don't violate the laws of physics any more than any chemicals or electricity anywhere else.

So, let's assume that PK ain't violating the laws of physics. If that's the case, then it goes something like this: The brain thinks about bending some silverware. Luckily, this particular kind of thinking causes some surge of energy to leap out of the brain from the brain's Super Secret Hidden Raygun--something near the frontal lobe which, mysteriously, disappears whenever it gets within slicing distance of an autopsy table. Dig it?

Okay. A word about this surge of energy:

It is powerful. More powerful than the force you can exert by your hands, apparently.

Interestingly enough, even though it's SO POWERFUL that it can bend the bowls of spoons, and zinc-plated steel rods, it doesn't damage the forehead of the person emitting this energy, nor disturb the air between the person doing the PKing and the object he or she is attempting to bend. That's because this is "time release energy." It's smart, see--it knows when it's approaching its target. When it gets there, it bends some damned metal, but it leaves all objects in the way utterly unblemished.

Clearly, this is VERY smart energy. How'd it figure all this out? How's it know the difference between "forehead," "air," and "spoon?" Where's this energy keep its brain? Amazing, non? Wonders never cease.

Paradoxically, New Agers most interested in using all of these energy-work techniques don't seem to burn any calories in doing so. They get this energy from nowhere, it seems (pay a bunch of them $100 an hour to spin a turbine at your local power plant, says I--damned near free energy!), because New Agers, as a whole, are mordantly obese. (ever been to a pagan festival? Dear GOD, they're enormous [though this is a generalization, it is pretty true. Go visit a Wiccan church sometime, or spend a few hours in a New Age bookstore. Avoid getting eaten long enough, and you'll wind up as spooked as me.])

ON THE OTHER HAND, there is a way for PK to exist and none of this Misty Mountain Raygun s**te would hold. That would involve something like:

You are NOT just a mass of bone and goo. There is a SPIRITUAL component to your mind, as well, which is not constrained by the laws of physics--and, in fact, is only constrained by the limitations of "the spirit world."

That seems to be the way most New Agers feel about this sort of thing, and to that, I say this: Show a single point of interaction between the "brain" and the "spirit," and I'll say, "Shizznit, you're right!" However, as near as we can tell, the brain seems to account for the whole of the mind, going in its merry, thinking, conscious way without any interference from some spooky, immaterial, astral whatevah. Ask my grandma. She has Alzheimer's--and unless Alzheimer's has a "spiritual component," like the organ it attacks, then the case seems pretty closed. Gram's disappearing, bit by bit, just 'cause kooky little tarry clogs are shutting down her neural pathways, a thousand at a time.

If the brain's physical actions--like thought and feeling--were being dictated by the spirit, wouldn't that spirit also have control over the other physical processes taking place in the brain? Like, you know, dementia?

So, both of these ideas seem pretty unlikely. But I'll accept either, or any other, theory regarding how these things might work, once again, if someone could just show up in my town with a decent demo. (but, beloved believers, 'till you have irrefutable evidence, ain't that a whole lot to swallow? C'mon, mang) 'Zat's all.

Yours in Christ,
- B

What a complete tithead.
 
Anders W. Bonde said:
Try bending a 3/8" rod of 7075-T6 aluminum alloy.

Then try bending a 3/8" rod of 5056-0 aluminum alloy of the same length.

Until the 5056 yields, they'll feel identical. After that point, the 5056 will work harden, especially after several "flexes", whereas you need to be pretty strong to get the 7075-T6 rod to yield at all (although I would've suggested something slightly thicker than 3/8" and/or shorter than 12").

FWIW.

That's worth a lot, actually. Thanks. You're a metallurgist, I take it?

Mr. Houck has informed me he now buys all his spoons and forks for parties from the following website, and suggests I might do the same for mine:

http://www.acemart.com/merchant.mv?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=AM&Category_Code=C3-11

They look like generic stainless steel flatware, yes? Also, when sites mention "silver-plated" flatware, what is the usual underlying metal? Is it usually copper? Such a spoon bowl would still be physically nearly impossible to bend with bare hands alone, right?

Mr. Houck is sending me videos of some of his own parties so that I may see how to conduct my own. I also have four friends driving out to his party in Ohio in 2 weeks. I've had them thoroughly review all the material I could find on the subject, including this thread. All are healthily skeptical, two are very well-versed in hypnosis, and all are bringing their own silverware. If they come back with a positive result, I'll feel pretty confident in further testing.

Either way, I'll post what they report here.
 
LettristLoon said:
McFly:

Try observing something without being conscious. Nigh impossible. Quantum craziness seems to have less to do with the immediate observer being "conscious" than it does with "being observed at all." Which, you know, vastly increases the effect of whatever's going on with those nutty little waves and particles and all.

I don't really know what I'm talking about, try though I might to understand it through the reading of pop science lit. Listen, though! I don't mean to derail nothin, but if you really want to tell if wave function collapse has to do with consciousness, try this:

Go into a room. Set it up for an experiment! Set up all your machines to record exactly what goes on. Flip yer switches, get it all rolling, and leave the damned room.

Come back a year later. See what happened. Then repeat the experiment while you're in the room.



What the hell are you talking about? Are you saying this proves the existence of a reality independent of consciousness?? If so you must be a retard.

A Word on The Laws of Physics: You know, we're mostly intelligent folks, here.

Who? Most of the people on here are impressively stupid.

It's okay to use dialectical short-hand when talking. Let's assume we know basic definitions.

But I didn't say "Known Laws of Physics" for a very decent reason. An "unknown law" will not account for things which do not happen. "People teleport!" "Violins copulate!" "Spoons bend!" We know people don't teleport and violins don't copulate and spoons don't bend because they're not ruled by "unknown laws:" They're ruled by the ones we already understand.

You know that people don't teleport and spoons don't bend? How do you know this?

Of course there are "unknown laws." Or, at least, there probably are. Or, who knows? Maybe there aren't. I'm just a journalist.

I can tell. Most journalists are mental retards.

Now, I know that, subjectively, there are a lot of things that brains do that we cannot fathom. Consciousness, for example. We cannot figure out why the subjective experience of consciousness is allowed for by the little machinations of brain tissues.

It's simply nopt possible; materialism is unintelligible, so is epiphenomenalism albeit for a differing reason. I can reproduce my refutation here if you wish.

But!

BUT!

The key, here, is "subjective." The OBJECTIVE behaviour of a brain is nothing very strange. Complicated, yessir--complicated in the extreme. But the processes taking place in a brain are not, physically, especially mind-blowing. There's just a great many of them, and they happen very quickly. You dig?

That's all I'm saying. Bending a spoon or a bar or something would require something OBJECTIVELY EXTRAORDINARY to be happening, physically, in and around a brain.

Why? Although I think most probably trickery of some nature is taking place at these parties, we nevertheless know that macropsychokinesis exists through the voluntary movements of our bodies.

And brains don't do that. All of their mystery is tied up in the subjective experience they present to their owners.

A brain is just a piece of meat, it can no more generate consciousness than any other physical thing or process.
 
Interesting Ian said:

What the hell are you talking about? Are you saying this proves the existence of a reality independent of consciousness?? If so you must be a retard. (snip)

Oh, dear. Couldn't you have just left it at "what a complete tithead?" Now this is going to launch into another several-page fruitless discussion, completely obscuring my original point. :(

Anyway, I like the post by Mr. Bonde. Anders Bonde. Ideas along those lines are appreciated.
 
flyboy217 said:


Oh, dear. Couldn't you have just left it at "what a complete tithead?" Now this is going to launch into another several-page fruitless discussion, completely obscuring my original point. :(

Anyway, I like the post by Mr. Bonde. Anders Bonde. Ideas along those lines are appreciated.

I told you so. You will find that Ian has no knowledge of neuropsychology so any discussion of this area tends to the characteristic wastelands of philosophy.

Ask him if objects of different weight fall at the same rate, I wager that he is ignorant of the experiment too.

Sigh...
 
Ed said:


I told you so. You will find that Ian has no knowledge of neuropsychology so any discussion of this area tends to the characteristic wastelands of philosophy.

Ask him if objects of different weight fall at the same rate, I wager that he is ignorant of the experiment too.

Sigh...

This is not what I was getting at. After posting my response to Loon's post, I didn't even bother to read Ian's. I'm simply not interested as far as this thread goes.

I only care about one thing here: what should my friends be looking for at the party, to gain reasonable evidence for whether or not the purported claim has any merit? They're bringing their own spoons (both stainless steel and silver-plated), they're highly intelligent, two are well-versed in hypnosis, and they're skeptical but not cynical.

I think that covers most of it. I'll report back in 2 weeks.
 

Back
Top Bottom