No one has accused your uncle of being a liar. If he tells you it hurts when you zap him with a remote, then I'll go along with that.You are all right. I am an engineer(software engineer tho) and this doesn't make any sense to me either. Still, I'd like to know for certain that this thing is paranormal before I start calling my uncle a liar.
However, I would like to rule out that it may be psychosomatic. That doesn't mean someone is consciously faking or lying. If he only experiences pain when he sees you zapping him, and experiences pain when zapped with an unloaded remote, then I expect there's a good possibility of it being psychosomatic rather than him having the inexplicable ability to detect modulated IR signals with his foot.
Anyone who's been through what he has, I'm willing to cut some slack. Traumatic experiences can do strange things to people and thought processes.
Burner
Thinker
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2007
- Messages
- 144
Some time ago someone mentioned to me
I suspect that your uncle has some accidental freakish bionic device implanted in him with this metal capacitively linked to a nerve.
Gene
That's exactly what I was concerned about. That shrapnel may somehow be treated as a 'device'. Wouldn't like to put him trough all this trouble just to have the application dismissed on account of him using a device.
CynicalSkeptic
Master Poster
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2006
- Messages
- 2,608
But it might be worthwhile for practical reasons. If you could figure out exactly what it was, and have it removed. It would help alleviate his pain.
Dumb All Over
A Little Ugly on the Side
How about a set of twenty identical remotes, ten with batteries and ten without. Have him state which ones he thinks cause him pain. Something like that? Pretty simple.
CynicalSkeptic
Master Poster
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2006
- Messages
- 2,608
Mount two remotes to a table a few feet away from where your uncle will sit, aimed at his leg. One with batteries, and one without. Let him know which is which. Zap him a few times with each to verify expected results. -- this is the control
Without moving either the remotes, or your uncle, Pull a screen between so he can't see the remote, nor the operator. Have a new operator (who doesn't know which has batteries and which doesn't*) randomly zap him with one or the other remote. Have an observer (who also doesn't know which remote is which) record button presses on the remote, and your uncle's indication of pain.
*Some remotes have an LED to let the operator know it's working, this would have to be covered or disabled. Also, have the remotes mounted to the table so they aren't hand held to detect a weight difference.
Here's how id suggest you do a double blind test.
Go to the store and buy a universal remote. Preferably one that does not have an extra LED that shows when a button is being pressed, although you can tape over this later.
Confirm that this remote causes the effect.
Buy a second remote of the same make, And tape over any 'activation' LEDs. There should be no indication that the remote is being used.
Have a third party take the remotes and reverse that batteries in one. Put them down and leave. Now you go and retrieve the remotes.
You know have a working remote and a 'dead' one that weighs the same you don't know which is witch.
Now you try the tests and your uncle tells you which one makes his foot hurt.
Uncover the 'activation' led or check the batteries to see if he was right.
As a double check, the infra red LED will often show up on a video recorder, make sure that no one is manning the recorder if you decide to film the test!
Good luck.
Go to the store and buy a universal remote. Preferably one that does not have an extra LED that shows when a button is being pressed, although you can tape over this later.
Confirm that this remote causes the effect.
Buy a second remote of the same make, And tape over any 'activation' LEDs. There should be no indication that the remote is being used.
Have a third party take the remotes and reverse that batteries in one. Put them down and leave. Now you go and retrieve the remotes.
You know have a working remote and a 'dead' one that weighs the same you don't know which is witch.
Now you try the tests and your uncle tells you which one makes his foot hurt.
Uncover the 'activation' led or check the batteries to see if he was right.
As a double check, the infra red LED will often show up on a video recorder, make sure that no one is manning the recorder if you decide to film the test!
Good luck.
Is the shrapnel so shallowly-embedded in his foot that you can see it? If not, there's not much IR reaching it at all; 800-900nm light doesn't penetrate flesh much better than 600-700nm (red) light does.
Does your uncle experience pain when outside in the sun? There's much higher IR irradiance in direct sunlight than there is in the beam of a remote control.
I have two theories: a) it's psychosomatic, or b) it's "Stop flipping channels, kid. I said stop! Back in my day, if you didn't like what was on, you had to walk--uphill!---to the telegraph station! And send a telegram---uphill!---to the radio-broadcaster! Nowadays you kids just push those buttons---there you go again! If you don't quit it, kid, why---uh---it'll make my shrapnel act up. Yes indeed. Excruciating. Now you go play and let me watch the bowl game."
Burner
Thinker
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2007
- Messages
- 144
Hehe. Well here's what happened:
We're all sitting in a room talking. TV is on and I'm sitting away from my uncle with one person in between us while he's lying on the couch. He can't see either my hands or the remote while I'm playing with the remote flipping it in my hand. I put the remote on my lap upside down probably pressing a button while at it. (I was not aware of this since I'm having a conversation) Few seconds later you could see my uncle turn red, goes suddenly quiet with painful expression on his face.
"Are you using the remote control? "
Me: "uhhh... no." (the channel isn't changing obviously)
"Stop it, you're killing me! Are you sure you're not pressing it?!"
I look down on my lap and see that the button is indeed pressed.
Me: "How did you know?"
"I hurts like hell when you do it"
Me: "Want a million dollars?"
As for the double blind test I was thinking along the same lines as Orangutan:
Get two identical remotes( I already have one universal remote), test it on him, see weather it hurts. If it doesn't, get the remote that does. (His TV and my TV remotes). Put both remotes in a position where he can't see them (behind him), preferably have him blindfolded, maybe even some sound insulation, earmuffs or something just to be on the safe side. Then, ask a third party to put batteries in one of the remotes and tape them both to a board. (so that you can't tell the weight difference). After that I'd press buttons of both remote controls and write down his reactions.(30 tries or so) After the test finishes I'd untape the remotes and analise the results. A hit would be him reporting pain while the button on the working remote was pressed. Everything else would be counted as a miss.
There are a few difficulties here tho. He claims that after he feels the pain from the remote it can take a long time for the pain to subside, half an hour or more. This could make the test last forever. Also, since his foot is after all, generally messed up, it's very possible he could report pain that wasn't remote control related. Especially if the test lasts for a long time - this would be almost inevitable IMO. If this is the case, I was thinking about an alternative procedure, perhaps with less tries but in a longer time-frame for a try. Let's say I do 10 tries, 5 on each remote, each lasting let's say.. 5 seconds, and each in a 10 minute time-frame. That would give him a 1 in 120 chance of guessing the exact time of one press or 1 in 600 for five presses (not sure about this one). If he can guess all five correctly I think that would be statistically significant.
Last edited:
Good proposal, Orangutan. Simple enough, efficient enough to determine a paranormal effect.
If the results point in this direction, increase the number of trials. Stricter controls to absolute double blind the test. But go ahead with this one first, Burner. I'd like to know the results.
(However, I don't think it's paranormal, since an interaction can be measured. But let's leave the semantics for later.)
If the results point in this direction, increase the number of trials. Stricter controls to absolute double blind the test. But go ahead with this one first, Burner. I'd like to know the results.
(However, I don't think it's paranormal, since an interaction can be measured. But let's leave the semantics for later.)
Blackwell
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2005
- Messages
- 1,293
In addition to the above suggestions, make sure to do the test in a room with no electronics/appliances that may give a clue as to whether a remote control button is being pressed (for instance, a channel indicator on a VCR advancing that you don't notice, but that your uncle can see.)
TheBoyPaj
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2003
- Messages
- 1,640
I don't quite understand this protocol. You have two remotes. Are both of them are operational? You try them each 5 times, making 10 trials of 10 minutes each.
The chap has to identify when the button has been pressed. Is that right?
What degree of delay will you accept as a hit? How about if he complains a few seconds after you released the button?
As I work it out using this page, the chances of getting 5 right out of 10 are 9x10-9, or one in over 100 million. *
That sounds pretty significant.
* I'm not a mathematician
Burner
Thinker
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2007
- Messages
- 144
What would be the purpose in that?
[/quote]
As I work it out using , the chances of getting 5 right out of 10 are 9x10-9, or one in over 100 million. *
That sounds pretty significant.
[/quote]
I'm really rusty on my probability account but I figured 1 hit inside 10 mins timeframe would be 5sec/600sec is 1 in 120 chance. It's prolly wrong.
TheBoyPaj
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2003
- Messages
- 1,640
Well, if one of them is not operational, why are you not taking that into account in your analysis of results? What happens if you set up proper blinding procedures, yet he reacts exactly on cue to button presses on the functioning remote AND the non-functioning one? Is that still a success?
The probability is 1 in 120 for a single trial, yes. If you have ten trials (with a live remote) and he gets 5 of them right, the probability goes down to 1 in 100,000,000. Adding in a non-functioning remote just clouds the issue.
The probability is 1 in 120 for a single trial, yes. If you have ten trials (with a live remote) and he gets 5 of them right, the probability goes down to 1 in 100,000,000. Adding in a non-functioning remote just clouds the issue.
AgingYoung
Muse
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2005
- Messages
- 973
You can never be too sure about things these days. I heard two guys talking about well logging several years ago and it seems they are sending cat scan tools down holes to get the geology of a well. I've heard that they can scan shipping containers and use 3d pattern recognition to determine what's in the container. Reminds me of the star trek 'tricorder'.
Here's a link for a bionic ear. I'd be tempted to get an implant for a million dollars. I think your uncle should have an mri to see if there's anything not human in him besides the shrapnel.
Gene
Here's a link for a bionic ear. I'd be tempted to get an implant for a million dollars. I think your uncle should have an mri to see if there's anything not human in him besides the shrapnel.
Gene
Burner
Thinker
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2007
- Messages
- 144
Well now that you say it, maybe we should redefine a successful test. Let's say a success would be if he reacted on all 5 working remote clicks and maybe 1 or 2 non working. The non working reaction could be explained as usual pain not related to the remote control.
He's forbidden by his physician to take a MRI. (Read above)
AgingYoung
Muse
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2005
- Messages
- 973
Now that you mention it I do recall the 'doctors orders' clause above. Call me a skeptical woo but I know the state of modern medicine is moving along at quite a clip. Implants are common today. I heard of a guy that had one that allowed him access to secure areas in his building. Ordinarily he would need a card pass but he replaced the card with an implant.
I don’t think your uncle’s condition is normal but I certainly don’t think it’s paranormal considering what can be done with the body these days.
Gene
I don’t think your uncle’s condition is normal but I certainly don’t think it’s paranormal considering what can be done with the body these days.
Gene
AgingYoung
Muse
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2005
- Messages
- 973
Your uncle is a pit viper.
gene
TheBoyPaj
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2003
- Messages
- 1,640
OK. In that case, let's look at it in two parts. 5 hits out of 5 trials with the working remote is hugely improbable. A probability of 4 x 10-11 or 1 in 25 billion *
Adding on the non-working remote trial has a couple of complications. Firstly, the odds of him passing are great. If he chooses a random time to yell out, he'll avoid the target period on 119/120 occasions. It doesn't change the odds much.
But if he's liable to report pain for reasons other than the stimulus, how does that affect the trials with the working remote? What if he feels pain more than once, including the target time? Do we still count it as a hit?
I'm starting to think that the best way is the simple "Is this remote working?" test. It's a simple 50/50 shot each time. Make them very short bursts, so he can recover. If he gets 14 right out of 15 then it's not too many trials and it's still odds of less than 1 in a thousand. That's good enough to give you an idea of whether it's worth going for the million dollar challange.
*I'm still not a mathematician