🚀 go-pugleaf

The Ghost In The Machine <e...@sirius.athghost7038suus.net> wrote in 
message <news:k2bv52-vd3.ln1@sirius.athghost7038suus.net>...
- Hide quoted text -

> In sci.physics, Morituri-Max
> <new...@sendarico.net>
>  wrote
> on Sat, 06 Nov 2004 05:39:41 GMT
> <xsZid.21939$tL5.2...@fe2.texas.rr.com>:
> > mike3 wrote:
> >> So then why not research it, to prove/disprove it's existence? Now THAT's
> >> what I call science. Or has it already been disproven conclusively?

> > Why not research whether a blue shirt with green stripes scares away striped
> > pink elephants better than a red shirt with yellow stripes?

> And here I thought it was striped tigers and finger-snapping.
> Hey, it's worked for decades here...  :-)

> Personally, I think ESP is a bit bunkish, if only because the
> brain only has about the power of a 20-25 W broadcaster, and
> is a very poor radio receiver


What counts is the computing power to process the signal, and the
possibility of the brain of acting like a receiver.
> unless augmented by what
> happens to be a variant of a galena crystal

Interesting, some substances may have the same effect in the brain,
and there special receptors...
>(e.g., a
> filling might rectify a strong radio signal nearby, and
> maybe cause the owner thereof to hear music).
> There's also no carrier wave to throw at a diode or FM discriminator.
> I suppose one might hear a lot of popping noises (the
> neurons conducting the signals are after all a sort of
> small radio antenna) if the gain's turned up enough.


Can the gain be turned up by `digital` processing? We have plenty of
processing in the interconnected network of the brain (the
hypothesis).
> I could see a "bed of nails" attached to the visual cortex,
> but that's about it; the effects would be interesting but
> it would probably require quite a bit of research before we
> can even hope to replace the computer monitor and speaker system... :-)

Sure, but it depends on how much money we throw at it, too...
> One issue at mass ESP screenings, though.  A common test is the
> 5x5 card test: star, circle, wavy lines, square, and cross are
> (IIRC) the traditional ones, and there are 5 of each.  The
> expected number of hits given pure chance is 5, but there is
> a well-defined probability curve for fewer and for more hits,
> during the experiment.  Suppose we filter out those who hit more
> than the average for further testing -- "oops, it's vanished, such
> a random ability, this ESP, it only happens when we're not looking
> for it"...


Yes, but then I envision correlations, not probability distributions
(see Schizophrenia as neurosis)

Les Cargill <lcarg...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message <news:YJYid.
69778$OD2.20156@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
> mike3 wrote:
> > "robert j. kolker" <nowh...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
> > news:2v2girF2fu9glU1@uni-berlin.de...

> >>Fabrizio J. Bonsignore wrote:

> >>>Telepathy has been considered one of the phenomena for which science
> >>>can offer no explanation, and which therefore is relegated to the
> >>>category of superstition,

> >>And for good reason. No one has ever proven there is such a phenomenon.

> >>Bob Kolker

> > And if it does exist, and somebody tries to prove it, they'll be blasted
> > into oblivion. No wonder no-one has, 'cause they aren't ALLOWED to!!!!!!!

> > What if some top scientists decided to conduct in-depth research into the
> > phenomenon to once and for all prove/disprove it's existence and settle
> > the matter? Essentially you are saying that if something isn't proven then
> > it
> > can't be researched -- but science is about attempting to find proof or
> > disproof of something. That's not advancement -- that's stonewalling.

> (Gad, this thing is crossposted to hell and back, but...)

> The problem is that there is no possible communications medium
> for these signals to be written on. It sorta points back to
> the Luminiferous Aether, which was embarassingly deprecated
> in what, 1930? 1906? (too lazy to look it up) by Michelson/Morley.

Well, radio waves do move through the `aether`. Though EEG waves are
between 1H and 50Hz, they *do* have an impact on Reality (cause and
effect), they can be detected THROUGH hard bone and hair. And given
that neurons are couted by billions and their *interconnections* are
an even bigger magnitude, and given that networks of neural computers
are universal computers (can comute any computable function), it all
boils down to how much computing power we need to to distinguish this
minimum, arbitrarily small effect of brain waves in the surrounding
electromagnetic spectrum to be able to make a match (mapping) against
the millions or more neurons that can process that really small 
signal
and turn it into meaningful messages.

mike4...@yahoo.com (mike3) wrote in message <news:
1d54b7e4.0411142357.53f6a37f@posting.google.com>...
> Sam Wormley <sworml...@mchsi.com> wrote in message <news:K2Uid.60791$R05.47100@attbi_s53>...
> > Fabrizio J. Bonsignore wrote:
> > > Telepathy has been considered one of the phenomena for which science
> > > can offer no explanation...
> >    Telepathy is considered bogus. Double blind studies show NO evidence
> >    of such an effect.

> >    http://www.csicop.org/cgi-bin/search/search.cgi?q=telepathy
> >    http://www.csicop.org/skeptiseum/Psychics.html

> So the studies have shown everything to be equal to chance -- which
> means that it's okay to do mor experiments and you won't be stopped --
> but you'll probably just get more of the same result -- equal to
> chance.


You are talking basic experiments of card reading and forecasting. I
am talking full fledged telepathy as possible due to the computing
processing of the brain, some basic brain chemistry and working facts
and observation of schizophrenics and other people in real life
situations. But remember that as people don't like to expose the
amount of money they have in the banl, willful volunteers to 
telepathy
experiments very probably want to deceive themselves as to having 
such
'power' more than show ther actual ability, while unsuccessful
telepaths very probably are suffering their lack of control and
showing the signs of what we usually call schizophrenia, though I 
have
made several interesting observations in real life in homeless
shelters... To prove this ability we need to take into account social
and psychological behaviour. But the theory is sound.

"robert j. kolker" <nowh...@nowhere.net> wrote in message <news:
2vs4ieF2ojthfU3@uni-berlin.de>...
> Fabrizio J. Bonsignore wrote:
> > shelters... To prove this ability we need to take into account social
> > and psychological behaviour. But the theory is sound.

> No theory is sound until it makes testable quantitative predictions
> which are supported by experiment. All attempts to establish the
> existence of telephath as a phenomenon have failed. The is no
> experimental evidence (worth anything) that such a thing even exists.
> What you have are Uri Geller tricks all of which can be reproduced by
> James Randi who will tell you up front what he is doing is bogus trickery.


Problem here is that the experiments deal with people. It is like
trying to prove the existence of a secret society and quantify their
actions. But maybe you haven`t read the thread Schizophrenia as
neurosis.

It is worth noticing that the telepathic ability may be present in
several animal species given that it is the number of 
interconnections
what gives computing power and even small brains, provided they have
the necessary `hardware` (resonators), can exhibit this roperty. This
can be one of the reasons why few animal species have more than very
basic `languages` (more like codes). One interestng speculation is
that dolphins and whales may have very elaborate thought
communication, given that water transmits electrical signals more
efficiently than water (can somebody test this idea?). That would
explain why despite their big brains they don`t have more articulate
languages. This fact is linked to the lack of complex manipulators,
which supposedly were instrumental (pun) in the development of the
brain language areas. Though some phenomena can be explained by
uncoordinated, autoorganizative control (anarchy seems to be able to
create perfect orders), where each unit proceses individually
information according to local rules, some of these phenomena may be
the result of this unseen communication. The development of the
neocortex and its ability to elaborate the complex world-models 
needed
to control the manipulation possible by the hand (always in a setting
of simultaneous determination), would have led to the atrophy of the
telepathic ability, despite its survival advantage. As evolutively
acquired abilities tend not to be lost but just go dormant, extreme
experiences can lead to the waking up of these latent ability. It can
be tested statistically by a strong correlation of soldiers, secret
agents or common people developing schizophrenia-like symptoms after
going through a life threatening situation.


mike4...@yahoo.com (mike3) wrote in message <news:
1d54b7e4.0411150003.6991ac27@posting.google.com>...
(snip)

The problem here is that we may not be able to distinguish the
information content from random noise, as we don`t know the form the
signal takes, thatis, we don`t know the brain activation patters 
code.
That is why I opted to approach it as computing power against signal
to noise ratio. The channel and the specific code are irrelevant as
long as we can show there is enough power to distinguish even very
small (lots of noise) signals. Do we have instruments sensitive 
enough
to gauge the effect of a dolphin`s brain effect on surrounding
electromagnetic fields? And it may be that the channel is not
electromagnetic at all, but as long as the computing power is enough
there is the possibiity of te phenomenon.
> 4. If, after a lot of rigorous testing, this is found most of the
> time, and
>    is not attributable to anything known about dolphins, then we've
> found a
>    new effect. If so, then it probably doesn't exist. Further tests
> would
>    probably seem to confirm this -- and thus people should be free
>    to do them.

This makes me remember an old legend about camels speaking... maybe 
we
need a different approach to test telepathy among `irrational` 
beings.

Yet there is a danger in telepathy: synchronization. As clinical
schizophrenia can be considered a form of neurosis or misadaptation 
of
true telepaths unable to mix immediate input with telepathic input,
ignorance and a lack of intellectual tools can lead to `weak` minds
being `directed` or, more graphically, sucked, by a stronger,
morepared and sophisticated mind. This can explain the phenomenon of
sects and mass suicides. Adepts, either through drugs or rituals
(deprivation, extreme situations), get opened to the ideology of the
leader and repetition of ide and thoughts lead the minds to become
synchronized. This can be explained and justified through the
mechanical statistics concept of magnetized fields if we consider 
that
brains are, y analogy, biological magnets.
Once minds are synchronized and subjected to the more sophisticate,
elaborate verbal construction of the leader and his/her goals,
individuals lose individuality and become more like members of an
anthill. For a human is a tragedy. It would be very difficult to know
whether mass suicides occur because the leader orders it or because
the situation is unbearable, though it can be observed that mass
suicides occur in small sects, small groups, not in big groups, and
also among ignorant people. Even without the hypothesis of total
telepathy, the sharing of an ideology can have the same effects.

This phenomenon can be contrarrested through education. A society of
wll educated and intellecutally oriented telepaths would not be prone
to the effect of synchronization, as each mind would be strong enough
to contrarrest the monothinking, a reason why religions mistrust
intelligence and individualistic education. Reading is essential.

This phenomenon may be known by governments and kept as many secrets
are kept. It would also explain the ferocity with which sects are
persecuted, as the loss of individuality is a very serious threat to
the individual`s survival. This event may be one of the real causes 
of
psychosis: the individual loses touch with reality because he is
synchronized to events occurring someplace else, therefore the 
context
of actions and words is missing. There *is* a single Reality, but the
individual is reacting to a subset of reality beyond its immediate
self, like somebody preparing for a tornado happening on the other
side of the world.

This text links with Masterminds, Theory of beliefs, Alive and Human,
Sterens and Guilt of Atonement.

The fact is that if drugs are triggers of telepathy (as schizophrenia
is assumed to be oneof the results of drugs, except perhaps cocaine,
which seems to be totally harmful and other chemical drugs that 
affect
the levels of serotonin), the prohibition of drugs is in esscence and
ultimately a form of repression, as this ban prohibits humans from
developing another level of communication. In fact, the ban is a
danger, since it is broken by very poor people, criminals and very
rich people, leaving the middle classes, the `decent` people, out of
the conversation. This fact may be the single reason of the
debilitating effects of schizophrenia, as the conversations would 
have
little or no point of contact and be performed by people of very low
culture. This should be obvious from the discussion of the thread for
those who have been following this thread since its inception in 
2002.

Michael Gray <fle...@newsguy.spam.com> wrote in message <news:
5djug09a0q1ij75ll4ge73k5bkjunu19d1@4ax.com>...
> Am I correct in my assumption that you are re-proposing the the old
> concept of the human brain radiating an electromagnetic field, can be
> detected by other human brains?
> And you give as "potential" support for this detection, EEGs, which do
> not detect EM radiation, but electrostatic voltages?


Not the field, but some signals. EEG does prove that there is such an
electromagnetic field. The connectionist system of the brain can be
modeled in such way.
> And that this is what makes people's feelings that telepathy exists,
> somehow justified?

There are meaningful coincidences. And I guess true telepaths if they
exist wouldn`t publish it openly. People used to be burned alive just
for having black cats...
> Then that version of "telepathy" *must* obey the various rules rules
> applying to the propogation of  electromagnetic radiation.
> Including it's power falling off with the square of distance, and
> travelling no faster than the speed of light.

Precisely. The question is whether the brain has enough computing
power to separate a diminishing signal from background noise.
> Oh, yes. I nearly forgot.
> The "phenomenon" should actually manifest itself in some testable way.

Again, I guess telepaths wouldn`t give away their advantage. And many
magicians may use telepathy and let people believe it is just a 
trick.
There is people who tune `radio station` with their fillings...
> So far, it has not done any of the above.
`it`, what?
> In fact, it has done a very good job of pretending as though it does
> not exist at all.
> A truly excellent job.

Secret societies usually do an excellent job.
> Your "food for thought" leaves me intellectually starving...

You already thought about it, as the post shows....

No deep knowledge, indeed, but we can detect electric activity even
without perforating the skull, and that`s my point.
> >The connectionist system of the brain can be
> >modeled in such way.
> I know of no such model.
> I know of models that are based on varying electric potential
> gradients, but none that rely on electromagnetic fields, or
> "radiation" as you originally put it.
> Could you please point to me a scientifically valid "connectionist"
> model of the brain that is based on electromagnetic fields.
> (Vis "photon exchange")

Some models can be analyzed in their dynamics (learning), from the
point of view of statistical mechanics, as a field being magnetized.
The Hopfield model, for instance.
> >> And that this is what makes people's feelings that telepathy exists,
> >> somehow justified?

This what?
> >There are meaningful coincidences. And I guess true telepaths if they
> >exist wouldn`t publish it openly. People used to be burned alive just
> >for having black cats...
> You're not seriously suggesting that EVERY single person who has this
> hidden but truly Earth-Shattering power, which if revealed, could make
> them master of the universe, and get them enough money to hire a large
> private army to protect them, don't do so because of a few apocryphal
> witch burnings hundreds of years ago?
> EVERY SINGLE one of them, in all of recorded history!?!


There is competition if there`s more than one; there should be
differences in power (ability) too. Are you sure those in power who
ACTUALLY got enough money and sorrounded themselves with an army
didn`t had (have) this truly Earth-Shattering power?
> Now that's either very funny, or so implausible that I cannot accept
> it.
> If *I* had the demonstrable power of telepathy, I would immediately
> grab Randi's million bucks, hire a few bodyguards, and live it up!
> So would any sane person.

And would you go about and publicize the fact to the whole world?
Particularly when telepathy is equivalent to hearing voices nad 
*that*
is equivalent to mental illness.
> >> Then that version of "telepathy" *must* obey the various rules rules
> >> applying to the propogation of  electromagnetic radiation.
> >> Including it's power falling off with the square of distance, and
> >> travelling no faster than the speed of light.
> >Precisely. The question is whether the brain has enough computing
> >power to separate a diminishing signal from background noise.

> Good point.
> And one that has been researched thoroughly
> And so far failed to manifest anything.


Do you have the figures?
> Of course there are many other phenomena that an EM signal should obey
> as well, such as being able to be blocked by an appropriate Faraday
> cage, etc etc.

Interesting...
> >> Oh, yes. I nearly forgot.
> >> The "phenomenon" should actually manifest itself in some testable way.
> >Again, I guess telepaths wouldn`t give away their advantage. And many
> >magicians may use telepathy and let people believe it is just a trick.
> >There is people who tune `radio station` with their fillings...

> Once again, you provide an utterly irrelevant example, which is
> supposed to support your proposition, but does nothing but show to me
> that your case is non-existent, if that's the best answer you can
> give.


Why irrelevant? Which example?
> And for your:
> "telepath's wouldn't give away their advantage."????!!!??
> What "advantage"?

Maybe the ability to know the black wizard wants to kill them... ;)
> The advantage to supply vapid answers to non-questions?
?
> The advantage to be able to predict distasters, but not until after
> they happen?

Volcanoes are telepathic!?!
> The advantage to live in a trailer park for the rest of their lives?
Please explain.
> Any sane telepathist would ditch those advantages in a second.
Please explain.
> And what would you say of the magician that uses telepathy in front of
> a small audience in a dingy dive in Encino every night, in order to be
> able to pay the rent on his 2 room flat, and have his mother dying of
> a curable disease because he can't afford the operation?

Maybe he is using a trick... or doesn`t have enough computing
capacity...
> Doesn't he know about Randi's challenge?
> When next  you see one of these "many" magicians, it is your duty to
> let them know that he can have $1 million, in a flash!
> Why can't these people use their telepathy to discover this fact?

No idea about the challenge. Is it really suitable to what telepahy
might actually do or is based on the assumptin of a fantastic sf
power?
> Are they *all* terminally thick?

 ?!
> >> So far, it has not done any of the above.
> >`it`, what?
> 'it' = Telepathy.
> >> In fact, it has done a very good job of pretending as though it does
> >> not exist at all.
> >> A truly excellent job.
> >Secret societies usually do an excellent job.

> Another utterly irrellevant example.
> And wrong. Secret societies do a terrible job of keeping secrets.


People would announce their `powers` openly during certain eras.
Priests, shamans, wizards, witches... they were at times recognized
and believed, then feared, and the notion of telepathy has been with
humans for a while... It doesn`t exist at all after the scientific
method revolution. How would you apply the scientific method to the
study of telepathy?  Or to the ability to improvise melodies?
> >> Your "food for thought" leaves me intellectually starving...
> >You already thought about it, as the post shows....
> 'it', what?

If THC grants telepathy by rectifying and conducting brain signals
after binding to cannabinoid receptors, it is just a matter of 
smelling
marihuana to become at least a partial telepath.
(by now the conclusion is precisely the contrary: marihuana acts as 
antitelepathic
and antischizophrenic; surprisingly marihuana would leave us out of 
church
inquisitions).

Fabrizio J Bonsignore now Danilo J Bonsignore