What is the definition of “I”? -- “I” is the software which runs on neural-network-HW

[tsig]

The difference between the scientist and the religious adept is the following:
1) The scientist does the experiment and checks out if the predictions of the model/theory are confirmed or not, and then based on the experimental results the scientist makes conclusions.
2) The religious adept says “I have not done the experiment, I will not do the experiment, I believe my religious dogma no matter what is the evidence, I will not look into the evidence, I am not interested in the evidence, I believe my religious dogma no matter what is the evidence”.

Neurocluster Brain Model is scientific model, so if you want to check whether it is correct or not – all you need to do is to carry out the experiments which are described in Neurocluster Brain Model.
If you have not carried out the needed experiments, if you do not have experimental results, then you are not qualified as scientist to make the judgment, your judgment is based purely on religious dogmas.
The most popular religious dogma claims that man has “indivisible-single-consciousness”, the adepts of this religious dogma will fight until “the last drop of blood” defending the religious dogma of “indivisible-single-consciousness”.

The adepts of this religious dogma (“man has indivisible-single-consciousness”) claim that “the brain has not enough place to contain second personality” – this claim has no experimental evidence whatsoever, this is 100% religious dogma.




Here is a homework task for the development of logical thinking for religious adepts who have strong religious fanatic faith that “man has indivisible-single-consciousness”:
Are you completely sure that your brain is really able to contain one(1) personality? What about the scenario when one(1) personality is unable to fit in the brain, and only half(1/2) or a quarter(1/4) or a tenth(1/10) of personality is able to fit in the brain – how about that? Let’s suppose that we claim that your brain is too small to contain whole one(1) personality, one(1) personality is unable to fit into your brain/head, and we claim that your brain/head contains only tenth(1/10) of personality – flag into your hands, go ahead and try to disprove the claim that your brain contains only tenth(1/10) of personality. The reasoning behind that is very simple: if man’s brain is able to fit one(1) personality then such man is able to carry out scientific experiments to check whether experimental results confirm the predictions of model/theory or not, however if the man’s brain is too small to fit one(1) personality then such man says “I have not done the experiment, I will not do the experiment, I believe my religious dogma no matter what is the evidence, I will not look into the evidence, I am not interested in the evidence, I believe my religious dogma no matter what is the evidence”.

How many personalities are we dealing with here.

 

[LarryS]

Definition of “religious adept”: a man who believes in religious dogma.
Definition of “religious dogma”: a claim which does not match the scientific criteria, a claim which has no experimental evidence.

Thanks for the clarification - I define the term differently, religious inept = a man/woman who believes in religious dogma. Any fool can believe anything.

 

[Donn]

NCB, I'm down with doing harmful self experiments that will confirm nothing on your dubious word.

I'll report back here should the brain fleas permit. I may be incapacitated by the process and confined, which would prevent my results reaching you.

Please know that I shall spend the greater quantity of my fleas on beaming mental tables of data to you. Tune in on the ascii telepathic band.

Your sciencish adept.
I go now to face the many skittering legs of the mind.

 

[neuroclusterbrain]

I don't see how you can know that "During imagining process the main personality has full total control over the objects which are being imagined."
In my own experience, I have little control over my imagination. I can't do the things you so glibly describe.
<…>
Posts 165 and 169:
I don't see how you can know that "During imagining process the main personality has full total control over the objects which are being imagined."
Got any evidence?

Evidence is around Donn – just ask people around you (your friends/relatives/coworkers/strangers/etc) if they are capable to have control over the objects which are being imagined.
A common mistake is the extrapolation of your own experience to all other people, assuming that “if I am not able to do that then nobody is able” (or “if I am able to do that then everybody is able”).
Some people are able to play piano, and others are not. Some people are able to speak Chinese, and others are not. Some people do have Eidetic memory and others do not have it. And so on.
If you are not able to speak Chinese then that does not mean that nobody is able to speak Chinese. If you do not have Eidetic memory then that does not mean that nobody has it.
If you have no control over your imagination then that does not mean that nobody is able to control over their imagination.

=======================
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eidetic_memory
Eidetic memory (/aɪˈdɛtɪk/) is an ability to recall images, sounds, or objects in memory after only a few instants of exposure, with high precision for some time after exposure, without using mnemonics. It occurs in a small number of children and generally is not found in adults. The word eidetic comes from the Greek word εἶδος (pronounced [êːdos], eidos, "seen").
=======================

 

[neuroclusterbrain]

Your claim is that your experiment somehow validates your theory. Let's say I think brain fleas embedded in the brain cause one to feel sadness. In my theory, depressing events attract brain fleas. So my experiment will be to cause someone to experience a depressing event, and then see if they become sad. If they do, then I've proved that they now have brain fleas, and that the brain fleas have caused them to become sad.

Explanation for RussDill about how the scientific method works.

Step #1
Carry out the experiments described in Neurocluster Brain Model and check out if experimental results confirm the results predicted by Neurocluster Brain Model. If experimental results confirm the predictions then proceed to Step #2.

Step #2
If you do not like Neurocluster Brain Model then go ahead and propose your own theory/model which would be able to predict the same results and which would explain the underlying mechanism. If you have not proposed the theory/model which would better predict/explain the experimental results than Neurocluster Brain Model predicts/explains, then Neurocluster Brain Model is the only option left no matter whether you like it or not.

Step #4: Neurocluster Brain Model predicts that: after prolonged repeatable experimentation with “spiritualistic séances” you have high risk to induce sleepwalking/MPD incidents for the “medium”, during which the “medium” will be moving/breaking/etc various things in his own house, and when after awakening he finds things broken and scattered around his house, he becomes scared and strongly convinced that “evil spirits have possessed his house” – in more advanced cases this leads to the lunatic asylum.

I've never sleep walked. How many seances are you claiming it would take for that to happen?

Step # 5: Just go and carry out “spiritualistic séances” using “thread with the attached needle method” for prolonged periods of time as described in previous posts. Please note that it is important to use thread with the attached needle, do not use planchette/cup/glass/saucer (or some other heavy object) as shown in Hollywood movies. This setup (thread with the attached needle) will allow the manifestation of microscopic muscular contractions of the hand controlled by autonomous neurocluster inside the brain of the medium – with this experimental setup you can carry as many reproducible experiments as you wish. Using planchette/cup/glass/saucer will not work for average statistical man. Using planchette/cup/glass/saucer might work for people who are already in the lunatic asylum, but that’s another story. Average statistical man must use thread with the attached needle in order to succeed in “invoking spirit”.

How long are these prolonged periods? How many sessions?

The questions of barehl are good and valid (“How many seances are you claiming it would take for that to happen? How long are these prolonged periods? How many sessions?”).

The number of needed séances varies greatly from person to person. In our experience we have seen cases when only 2-3 séances were enough to induce sleepwalking incidents with moving/breaking things in home during sleepwalking incidents. For other persons the needed number of séances is much bigger, sometimes as much as half-year or year with séances carried out several times (2-5) per week. However it is important to note, that the term “séances” means “successful séances” when the “spirit” (==autonomous neurocluster) transmits meaningful messages which are confirmed by the “medium” as “I am very sure that these not my thoughts”. “Unsuccessful séances” do not count.
Experimental statistical data shows that women are much more successful in “invoking spirits” then men.

=======================
http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/57688/gass?sequence=2
While historians differ about the precise ratio of male to female witches across Europe, scholars agree that approximately seventy-five to eighty per cent of executed witches were women.
=======================
https://books.google.com/books?id=e...yIcKyUc_BgdgC&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
The etiology of MPD has been explored from a clinical perspective. In general, the female to male ratio is on the order of 10:1; some believe, however, that more men could be identified.
=======================
https://books.google.com/books?id=J...&q=ratio women men demonic possession&f=false
My guess is that, across the board, there would be something like a 75 to 25 ratio favoring female over male spirit possession.
=======================

Who will be my control group if I'm busy mangling my psyche on the way to an Institution? Seems cruel of you to suggest it.

First, Donn believes that the “spiritualistic séances” do not invoke sleepwalking/MPD incidents, thus if Donn is right then nothing will happen to Donn, so there is nothing to be afraid for Donn.

Second, you do not need to complete all steps of experiment in order to ascertain the existence of autonomous neuroclusters. You do not need to wait for manifestation of sleepwalking/MPD incidents, you can stop right after the first “successful séance with invoked spirit”. The reason behind that is very simple – when a man for the first time in his life receives meaningful messages from the “spirit” (==autonomous neurocluster) the usual reaction is shock and astonishment, because that man can very easily instantaneously identify that these messages are “not his thoughts for sure”. For this man personally one “successful séance with invoked spirit” is enough proof that autonomous neuroclusters is a real phenomenon.
However for outside observers that “séance with invoked spirit” might look like a simple hoax. So in order to convince the outside observers the manifestation of sleepwalking/MPD incidents are needed.
So it’s totally up to you at which point you would like to stop the experiment. If you want to obtain more convincing evidence then carry out “séances” until sleepwalking/MPD incidents are invoked.

NCB, I'm down with doing harmful self experiments that will confirm nothing on your dubious word.
I'll report back here should the brain fleas permit. I may be incapacitated by the process and confined, which would prevent my results reaching you.
Please know that I shall spend the greater quantity of my fleas on beaming mental tables of data to you. Tune in on the ascii telepathic band.
Your sciencish adept.
I go now to face the many skittering legs of the mind.

More volunteers are welcome.

 

[RussDill]

If you do not like Neurocluster Brain Model then go ahead and propose your own theory/model which would be able to predict the same results and which would explain the underlying mechanism. If you have not proposed the theory/model which would better predict/explain the experimental results than Neurocluster Brain Model predicts/explains, then Neurocluster Brain Model is the only option left no matter whether you like it or not.

Very simple, seances attract brain mites. Brain mites like to burrow into the part of the brain that handles sleep cycles, causing sleep walking, blackouts, etc.

 

[Kid Eager]

Step 1 is unscientific.

If the results of step 1 agree with the NCB hypothesis, that in itself is not enough *unless* those same results are not similarly explicable with existing theories.

The experiment needs to demonstrate results that are uniquely explicable under the NCB hypothesis - that's just the starting point. It's a data point, not a proof...

 

[Donn]

.. how the scientific method works...

How the scientific method works, an amateur's summary:

1. Design an experiment that will test the hypothesis.
2. Run it and gather data.
3. Design an experiment that will break the hypothesis.
4. Run it and gather data.
5. Have you reached a point where there is no room for doubt between the two?
6. If not, alter the hypothesis to reflect the new data and go back to 1.
7. If so, you have found a good basis to support or deny your hypothesis.

The number of needed séances varies greatly … only 2-3 séances … sometimes as much as half-year or year with séances carried out several times (2-5) per week.

I shudder to think of the poor souls you have under sway.

“Unsuccessful séances” do not count.

Unsuccessful experiments yield data that does count. That you clutch only confirmatory results exposes your essential flaw.

Experimental statistical data shows that women are much more successful in “invoking spirits” then men.

How do you know this if you discard the unsuccessful results? Oh, wait, you googled it. Ah.

First, Donn believes that the “spiritualistic séances” do not invoke sleepwalking/MPD incidents, thus if Donn is right then nothing will happen to Donn, so there is nothing to be afraid for Donn.

Firstly, I believe nothing — for or agin. Secondly, I am not going to experiment on myself. Your robotic legion demeanour has missed all the concerns about ethics; concerns plain and sarcastic.

I take it back, I do believe something — you (pl.) are not scientists. What that means, I leave between the lines.

…you do not need to complete all steps of experiment in order to ascertain the existence of autonomous neuroclusters. You do not need to wait for manifestation of sleepwalking/MPD incidents, you can stop right after the first “successful séance with invoked spirit”.

Another example of your terrible communications. Why mention this now? Are you fitting your experiment to the narrative? A little while ago it was somnambulism and property damage that was your beacon.

However for outside observers that “séance with invoked spirit” might look like a simple hoax. So in order to convince the outside observers the manifestation of sleepwalking/MPD incidents are needed.

Oh… Why do you want to convince "outside observers" with extraneous data? Why are your results not concentrated — removing as much room for variables and unknowns as possible?

The reason behind that is very simple – when a man for the first time in his life receives meaningful messages from the “spirit” (==autonomous neurocluster) the usual reaction is shock and astonishment, because that man can very easily instantaneously identify that these messages are “not his thoughts for sure”. For this man personally one “successful séance with invoked spirit” is enough proof that autonomous neuroclusters is a real phenomenon.

I have managed to keep my heart beating for decades. My stomach, to dismal extents, works away. I've managed to dream too, without shock or astonishment.

The brain fleas are busy.

 

[neuroclusterbrain]

If the results of step 1 agree with the NCB hypothesis, that in itself is not enough *unless* those same results are not similarly explicable with existing theories.
The experiment needs to demonstrate results that are uniquely explicable under the NCB hypothesis - that's just the starting point. It's a data point, not a proof...

Yes, that is correct – if the experimental results confirm the predictions, then the hypothesis is considered more likely to be correct, but might still be wrong and continue to be subject to further testing.

=======================
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method
Experiments
Once predictions are made, they can be sought by experiments. If the test results contradict the predictions, the hypotheses which entailed them are called into question and become less tenable. Sometimes the experiments are conducted incorrectly or are not very well designed, when compared to a crucial experiment. If the experimental results confirm the predictions, then the hypotheses are considered more likely to be correct, but might still be wrong and continue to be subject to further testing. The experimental control is a technique for dealing with observational error. This technique uses the contrast between multiple samples (or observations) under differing conditions to see what varies or what remains the same. We vary the conditions for each measurement, to help isolate what has changed. Mill's canons can then help us figure out what the important factor is. Factor analysis is one technique for discovering the important factor in an effect.
=======================

*unless* those same results are not similarly explicable with existing theories.

Question for Kid Eager: can you provide any other alternative model/theory which would predict/explain that “spiritualistic séances” invoke sleepwalking/MPD incidents? Go ahead, show us such alternative model/theory, it will be interesting to see it.

The experiment <…> that's just the starting point. It's a data point, not a proof...

That is correct – the experiment is the starting point. So go ahead and do the experiment, collect the data points, collect the database of experimental results. Instead of philosophical-theoretical blabber just do the experiment. Run the experiment as many times as you can, collect the database of experimental results. It does not matter if you yourself will be incapable to process/analyze these experimental results, just collect the database of experimental results, and other scientists will process your data later.

The experimental setup is very simple and the cost of equipment is less than a dollar.
All you need are:
1) the needle;
2) the thread (length approximately 20-40 cm, 30 cm is the statistical average, the concrete comfortable length depends on the length of the hand of the "medium");
3) one standard A4-size sheet of paper, on this sheet of paper write down the alphabet letters in circle, which should look like this image:
http://neuroclusterbrain.com/img/spirit_board_001.jpg


Place this sheet of paper on the table, take the thread with attached needle into the hand, and then position your hand over the sheet of paper in such a way that the needle is hanging above the center of the circle with alphabet letters, however the needle is not touching the sheet of paper, the needle is hanging above the sheet of paper at a distance of several centimeters from the paper. Then concentrate and start the “invocation of the spirit”. Choose freely the character whose “spirit” you want to “invoke”, as for example your dead grandfather, some historical person, some fictional character – it does not matter at all which character you will choose. All that matters here is – whatever “spirit” will be able to respond and communicate meaningful messages via movements of the hanging needle, is good enough for the experiment. As for example, you can try invoking Napoleon’s spirit – all you need to is – while keeping the thread with the needle above the center of the circle with alphabet letters, ask the question “Hello, Napoleon’s spirit, please come, I want to talk with you, are you here?”. And watch carefully for the movements of the needle. If the needle starts moving forming meaningful words/sentences from the alphabet letters then the communication channel with the “spirit” is established. If invoking of Napoleon’s spirit has failed (the needle does not move or moves randomly without forming meaningful words/sentences) then choose another character and repeat the same exact procedure anew, like for example “Hello, grandfather’s spirit, please come, I want to talk with you, are you here?”. If invoking of spirit has failed again, then repeat the same exact procedure every time choosing another character. It is important to note here, that during the first “séances” do not expect long fluent sentences from the “spirit”, if that “spirit” will be able to form one word from letters of alphabet then that is already the great achievement. The intelligence level of majority of “spirits” is pretty low – getting one word as the answer to the asked question is a great achievement for that “spirit”. When “séances” with the same “spirit” are repeated again and again then the fluency/speed of “spirit’s speech” increases with every new “séance”. If you are lucky enough, then you can establish the communication channel with the “spirit” which will begin broadcast of the “spiritual knowledge about the structure of the universe, the moral lessons for the whole humanity across the globe, etc.” – such cases are quite rare, however you have small chance to succeed in that. One such typical classic example of autonomic neurocluster is so called “archangel Gabriel” which dictated the text of Quran to Muhammad.
=======================
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad
The Quran is the central religious text of Islam. Muslims believe that it represents the words of God revealed to Muhammad through the archangel Gabriel.
=======================


If you are failing to establish “communication channel” with the “spirit” then bellow are the techniques which might help:
1) If you are holding the thread with a needle in the right hand and “invoking of spirit” fails, then try holding the thread with a needle with another hand, try with the left hand, this might help. You need to find out which of your hands (right or left) is more successful in carrying out “séances”.
2) Experimental results have shown that coffee/alcohol/cigarettes/drugs/etc affects the “communication channel with the spirit” – the usage of even small doses of coffee/alcohol/cigarettes/drugs/etc either facilitates or hinders the “communication channel” – for different people the effect is different, however in your case the effect might be facilitation, so why not to try it, it might help. Of course, the preferred experimental setup is the complete soberness of the “medium”, however if “invocation of spirit” fails no matter how hard you try, then you have nothing to lose trying the same “invocation of spirit” procedure after the usage of small doses of coffee/alcohol/cigarettes/drugs/etc.

 

[Donn]

That is correct – the experiment is the starting point. So go ahead and do the experiment, collect the data points, collect the database of experimental results.

Why? It's your baby. How would my doing this vague hack experiment be quality controlled? How would you know my results are genuine? Why should I take time from my life to do this? Why should I chance interruption to sleep and possible harm?

 

[tsig]

Why? It's your baby. How would my doing this vague hack experiment be quality controlled? How would you know my results are genuine? Why should I take time from my life to do this? Why should I chance interruption to sleep and possible harm?

The upside is that you may get to communicate with a spirit so slow it can hardly form three letter words on the downside you may become possessed, do all matter of evil and go to hell.

 

[Donn]

Decisions, decisions…

 

[barehl]

The answer is simple.

And yet what follows is quite long and absent any substance. Do you not understand the difference between anecdote and explanation?

 

[barehl]

Choose freely the character whose “spirit” you want to “invoke”, as for example your dead grandfather, some historical person, some fictional character – it does not matter at all which character you will choose.

I think you should invoke the spirit of consciousness theories and ask for his assistance.

 

[neuroclusterbrain]

How the scientific method works, an amateur's summary:
1. Design an experiment that will test the hypothesis.
2. Run it and gather data.
3. Design an experiment that will break the hypothesis.
4. Run it and gather data.
5. Have you reached a point where there is no room for doubt between the two?
6. If not, alter the hypothesis to reflect the new data and go back to 1.
7. If so, you have found a good basis to support or deny your hypothesis.

That is correct. Now go and do the Step #1 and Step #2 – run the experiment and collect the data, and do not return back until the experiment is completed.

The number of needed séances varies greatly from person to person. In our experience we have seen cases when only 2-3 séances were enough to induce sleepwalking incidents with moving/breaking things in home during sleepwalking incidents. For other persons the needed number of séances is much bigger, sometimes as much as half-year or year with séances carried out several times (2-5) per week. However it is important to note, that the term “séances” means “successful séances” when the “spirit” (==autonomous neurocluster) transmits meaningful messages which are confirmed by the “medium” as “I am very sure that these not my thoughts”. “Unsuccessful séances” do not count.

Unsuccessful experiments yield data that does count. That you clutch only confirmatory results exposes your essential flaw.

That is not the flaw, that is the design of scientific experiment. You take statistically large sample of people and then you split it into two groups: 1) an “experimental group”, and 2) a “control group.”
In order to run the scientific experiment, you need to have:
1) “experimental group” – this is the group of people who are able to establish communication channel with the “spirit” – Neurocluster Brain Model predicts that some percentage of this experimental group of people will get sleepwalking/MPD incidents after carrying out “séances” for prolonged period of time.
2) “control group” – this is the group of people who are unable to establish communication channel with the “spirit” – Neurocluster Brain Model predicts that nobody from this experimental group of people will get sleepwalking/MPD incidents.

This is the scientific setup of the experiment. You split the original sample of people into two groups (“experimental group” and “control group”) and then watch the results for both groups.

=======================
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experiment
A controlled experiment often compares the results obtained from experimental samples against control samples, which are practically identical to the experimental sample except for the one aspect whose effect is being tested (the independent variable). A good example would be a drug trial. The sample or group receiving the drug would be the experimental group (treatment group); and the one receiving the placebo or regular treatment would be the control one.
=======================

=======================
http://www.uwmedicine.org/research/research-trials/terms
Clinical trial
A clinical trial is a research study designed to test the safety and/or effectiveness of drugs, devices, treatments, or preventive measures in humans. Clinical trials can usually be divided into four categories or "phases".

Control group
In a particular study, researchers may divide participants into two groups — an "experimental group" and a "control group." The experimental group is given the experimental treatment under study, while the control group may be given either the standard treatment for the illness or a placebo. At the end of the study, the results of the two groups are compared to determine the effectiveness of the experimental treatment.

Experimental group
Study participants in the experimental group receive the drug, device, treatment, or intervention under study. In some studies, all participants are in the experimental group. In "controlled studies," participants will be assigned either to an experimental group or to a control group.
=======================

Experimental statistical data shows that women are much more successful in “invoking spirits” then men.

=======================
http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/57688/gass?sequence=2
While historians differ about the precise ratio of male to female witches across Europe, scholars agree that approximately seventy-five to eighty per cent of executed witches were women.
=======================
https://books.google.com/books?id=e...yIcKyUc_BgdgC&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
The etiology of MPD has been explored from a clinical perspective. In general, the female to male ratio is on the order of 10:1; some believe, however, that more men could be identified.
=======================
https://books.google.com/books?id=J...&q=ratio women men demonic possession&f=false
My guess is that, across the board, there would be something like a 75 to 25 ratio favoring female over male spirit possession.
=======================

How do you know this if you discard the unsuccessful results? Oh, wait, you googled it. Ah.

This is not the “discarding of unsuccessful results”. This is the percentage of people who are able to “invoke spirit” in one group or another. Our experimental data shows that women are much more successful in “invoking spirits” then men. The same results are reported by other sources, google is just the tool to find these other sources.

I am not going to experiment on myself. Your robotic legion demeanour has missed all the concerns about ethics; concerns plain and sarcastic.

Donn’s inability to carry out simple experiments due his religious beliefs is not the scientific argument.

Additional explanation for the adepts of mainstream religions (Christianity/Islam/etc). Adepts of mainstream religions are very afraid of spiritualistic séances because they think that this technique is only for invocation of demon-spirits. However what they do not know is that the same exactly technique (“thread with the attached needle method”) is very suitable for invoking of saint spirits like Jesus/Mary/Muhammad/Krisha/Buddha/etc.

So if you are talking with a Christian, all you need to do is to ask “Would you like to talk directly with Jesus? You can talk directly with Jesus very easily right now. Here is what you need to do. Take the thread with the attached needle….<give full instructions here>.”
During the séance he needs to say “Hello, Jesus’s spirit, please come, I want to talk with you, are you here?”. An the “Jesus” will come and the “Jesus” will talk to him directly via thread with the attached needle.
“Direct talking to Jesus” – isn’t that the most desired experience that Christians dream of? And you can talk directly to Jesus right now, just take the thread with the attached needle and carry out the séance.

As it was written in previous post, it does not matter at all which character you will choose. All that matters here is – whatever “spirit” will be able to respond and communicate meaningful messages via movements of the hanging needle, is good enough for the experiment.

Second, you do not need to complete all steps of experiment in order to ascertain the existence of autonomous neuroclusters. You do not need to wait for manifestation of sleepwalking/MPD incidents, you can stop right after the first “successful séance with invoked spirit”. The reason behind that is very simple – when a man for the first time in his life receives meaningful messages from the “spirit” (==autonomous neurocluster) the usual reaction is shock and astonishment, because that man can very easily instantaneously identify that these messages are “not his thoughts for sure”. For this man personally one “successful séance with invoked spirit” is enough proof that autonomous neuroclusters is a real phenomenon.
However for outside observers that “séance with invoked spirit” might look like a simple hoax. So in order to convince the outside observers the manifestation of sleepwalking/MPD incidents are needed.
So it’s totally up to you at which point you would like to stop the experiment. If you want to obtain more convincing evidence then carry out “séances” until sleepwalking/MPD incidents are invoked.

Another example of your terrible communications. Why mention this now? Are you fitting your experiment to the narrative? A little while ago it was somnambulism and property damage that was your beacon.

That is the adaptation of the experiment for those people who are very afraid to get sleepwalking/MPD incidents.
In order to ascertain the existence of autonomous neuroclusters personally for you, it is enough to receive several meaningful messages from the “invoked spirit” which instantaneously can be identified as “these are not my thoughts for sure” – that will be enough proof for you personally.
However other people most probably will not believe your story, so in order to convince these other people, the invocation of sleepwalking/MPD incidents is much stronger evidence for them.

 

[Kid Eager]

Sounds like you got it all sorted out.

I can't wait for your report on the experiments.

 

[Donn]

Yeah, it's proper sciencish now. We can but await the paper in the PuffHo or Reddit.

 

[Donn]

In order to run the scientific experiment, you need to have:
1) “experimental group” – this is the group of people who are able to establish communication channel with the “spirit” – Neurocluster Brain Model predicts that some percentage of this experimental group of people will get sleepwalking/MPD incidents after carrying out “séances” for prolonged period of time.
2) “control group” – this is the group of people who are unable to establish communication channel with the “spirit” – Neurocluster Brain Model predicts that nobody from this experimental group of people will get sleepwalking/MPD incidents.

Rot. The control group is there to make sure you are not fooling yourself. You should not know beforehand that they're "unable to establish blah blah". That's just bias.

The rest of your post is the usual empathic blunt trauma.

 

[Kid Eager]

Rot. The control group is there to make sure you are not fooling yourself. You should not know beforehand that they're "unable to establish blah blah". That's just bias.

The rest of your post is the usual empathic blunt trauma.

Lol. Not much of a control group.

It should be people of similar demographic segments who don't do seances at all, to establish MPD in comparable populace.

People should be radomly assigned to the test or control groups *without knowing nor discovering during the experiement the purpose or expected outcomes of the experiment* .

 

[Donn]

I was going to add they should have placebo seance devices… but my head nearly broke.