Discussion:
A step toward psionics?
Add Reply
J. Clarke
2018-10-08 01:05:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
There has been a tendency of late ot become dismissive of psionics in
the SF community. Seems that the real world is less dismissive.

https://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/

Give this another 100 years of development and what are you going to
have?
Robert Carnegie
2018-10-08 02:03:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
There has been a tendency of late ot become dismissive of psionics in
the SF community. Seems that the real world is less dismissive.
https://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/
Give this another 100 years of development and what are you going to
have?
<http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/pl.cgi?305797> probably.
(Tripods: _The White Mountains_ by John Christopher)
Ahasuerus
2018-10-08 02:43:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
There has been a tendency of late ot become dismissive of psionics in
the SF community. [snip]
For some values "of late"...
Sjouke Burry
2018-10-08 03:01:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
There has been a tendency of late ot become dismissive of psionics in
the SF community. Seems that the real world is less dismissive.
https://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/
Give this another 100 years of development and what are you going to
have?
A splitting headache.
Titus G
2018-10-08 05:15:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Sjouke Burry
Post by J. Clarke
There has been a tendency of late ot become dismissive of psionics in
the SF community.  Seems that the real world is less dismissive.
https://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/
Give this another 100 years of development and what are you going to
have?
A splitting headache.
An inexplicable impulsive urge to buy even more stuff that I do not need
nor want?
Dimensional Traveler
2018-10-08 05:53:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Titus G
Post by Sjouke Burry
Post by J. Clarke
There has been a tendency of late ot become dismissive of psionics in
the SF community.  Seems that the real world is less dismissive.
https://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/
Give this another 100 years of development and what are you going to
have?
A splitting headache.
An inexplicable impulsive urge to buy even more stuff that I do not need
nor want?
At least you'll understand the need to buy more aspirin.
--
Inquiring minds want to know while minds with a self-preservation
instinct are running screaming.
Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha
2018-10-08 15:16:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
There has been a tendency of late ot become dismissive of
psionics in the SF community. Seems that the real world is less
dismissive.
And in the science community.
Post by J. Clarke
https://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-co
lleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/
Give this another 100 years of development and what are you
going to have?
I dunno, but it won't be psionics by any rational definition.
--
Terry Austin

Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
Joe Bernstein
2018-10-09 04:15:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
There has been a tendency of late ot become dismissive of psionics in
the SF community. Seems that the real world is less dismissive.
https://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/
Give this another 100 years of development and what are you going to
have?
Um, another five years of development and they got it to be a network,
i.e., inputs from two brains into one. I posted about that a few
days ago.

Subject: [OT] BrainNet: A Multi-Person Brain-to-Brain Interface for Direct Collaboration Between Brains

Oh, and only a rational person would think this has to do with
psionics, since normal people always know that psionics would be
impossible even if everyone could do them from birth.

-- JLB
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
2018-10-09 22:35:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
There has been a tendency of late ot become dismissive of psionics in
the SF community. Seems that the real world is less dismissive.
https://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/
Give this another 100 years of development and what are you going to
have?
Cybernetic implants, not psionics.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.dreamwidth.org
J. Clarke
2018-10-10 00:16:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 18:35:58 -0400, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by J. Clarke
There has been a tendency of late ot become dismissive of psionics in
the SF community. Seems that the real world is less dismissive.
https://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/
Give this another 100 years of development and what are you going to
have?
Cybernetic implants, not psionics.
No "implants" involved.
Robert Carnegie
2018-10-10 04:22:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 18:35:58 -0400, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
Post by Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Post by J. Clarke
There has been a tendency of late ot become dismissive of psionics in
the SF community. Seems that the real world is less dismissive.
https://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/
Give this another 100 years of development and what are you going to
have?
Cybernetic implants, not psionics.
No "implants" involved.
<http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/comic.php?date=20071005> ?
David DeLaney
2018-10-13 15:03:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
There has been a tendency of late ot become dismissive of psionics in
the SF community. Seems that the real world is less dismissive.
< https://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues
-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/>
Post by J. Clarke
Give this another 100 years of development and what are you going to have?
[\psi]bernetic implants, not psionics.
i've fixed your future for you
it should be more functional now

Dave, the rakshasa are nothing if not arbitrary
--
\/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
my gatekeeper archives are no longer accessible :( / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Quadibloc
2018-10-10 05:03:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
There has been a tendency of late ot become dismissive of psionics in
the SF community. Seems that the real world is less dismissive.
https://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/
Give this another 100 years of development and what are you going to
have?
Since this involves directly connecting to the brain electrically, it in no way
involves the very basis of psionics - some ability of the brain to directly
transmit information or exert force.

That, of course, does not mean that in 100 years of development, this could not
be used to create interfaces that superficially resemble psionics.

John Savard
J. Clarke
2018-10-10 22:40:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
There has been a tendency of late ot become dismissive of psionics in
the SF community. Seems that the real world is less dismissive.
https://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/
Give this another 100 years of development and what are you going to
have?
Since this involves directly connecting to the brain electrically, it in no way
involves the very basis of psionics - some ability of the brain to directly
transmit information or exert force.
That's ESP. Psionics is the technological implementation or
augmentation of such a capability.
Michael F. Stemper
2018-10-12 16:52:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
There has been a tendency of late ot become dismissive of psionics in
the SF community. Seems that the real world is less dismissive.
https://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/
I got to the third paragraph and read:

While researchers at Duke University have demonstrated brain-to-brain
communication between two rats [...]

After the Rhine experiments, anything that references Duke and
parapsychology in a positive light is automatically suspect in my
book. I don't care how much they impressed JWC.
--
Michael F. Stemper
Zechariah 7:10
J. Clarke
2018-10-13 00:13:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 11:52:44 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
Post by Michael F. Stemper
Post by J. Clarke
There has been a tendency of late ot become dismissive of psionics in
the SF community. Seems that the real world is less dismissive.
https://www.washington.edu/news/2013/08/27/researcher-controls-colleagues-motions-in-1st-human-brain-to-brain-interface/
While researchers at Duke University have demonstrated brain-to-brain
communication between two rats [...]
After the Rhine experiments, anything that references Duke and
parapsychology in a positive light is automatically suspect in my
book. I don't care how much they impressed JWC.
What, specifically, is your objection to their research?
Quadibloc
2018-10-13 04:35:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 11:52:44 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
Post by Michael F. Stemper
After the Rhine experiments, anything that references Duke and
parapsychology in a positive light is automatically suspect in my
book. I don't care how much they impressed JWC.
What, specifically, is your objection to their research?
I thought he was very clear. He had no specific objection to the research
involving cats. But apparently the Rhine experiments on ESP with the Zener cards
were so discredited as to cast a pall over that University's reputation.

As to why J. B. Rhine's research is discredited, you can look it up on
Wikipedia.

(Since this particular research has nothing to do with ESP, though, I think the
reaction is unwarranted.)

John Savard
Robert Carnegie
2018-10-13 12:50:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 11:52:44 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
Post by Michael F. Stemper
After the Rhine experiments, anything that references Duke and
parapsychology in a positive light is automatically suspect in my
book. I don't care how much they impressed JWC.
What, specifically, is your objection to their research?
I thought he was very clear. He had no specific objection to the research
involving cats.
Rats. (Or was it bats? Recently read "Alice's Adventures in
Wonderland".)

Maybe they also did cats, /then/ humans.
Post by Quadibloc
But apparently the Rhine experiments on ESP with the Zener cards
were so discredited as to cast a pall over that University's reputation.
As to why J. B. Rhine's research is discredited, you can look it up on
Wikipedia.
(Since this particular research has nothing to do with ESP, though, I think the
reaction is unwarranted.)
John Savard
Quadibloc
2018-10-13 23:39:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Robert Carnegie
Post by Quadibloc
I thought he was very clear. He had no specific objection to the research
involving cats.
Rats. (Or was it bats? Recently read "Alice's Adventures in
Wonderland".)
Maybe they also did cats, /then/ humans.
I don't know why I thought research involving an electrical link between cat
brains, instead of human brains with a reference to previous work involving
rats, was what I read. Maybe I looked at a different link in another post in
this thread?

John Savard
J. Clarke
2018-10-13 13:44:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 21:35:20 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 11:52:44 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
Post by Michael F. Stemper
After the Rhine experiments, anything that references Duke and
parapsychology in a positive light is automatically suspect in my
book. I don't care how much they impressed JWC.
What, specifically, is your objection to their research?
I thought he was very clear. He had no specific objection to the research
involving cats. But apparently the Rhine experiments on ESP with the Zener cards
were so discredited as to cast a pall over that University's reputation.
As to why J. B. Rhine's research is discredited, you can look it up on
Wikipedia.
Nothing there about "discredited". Scientists try to study new
things. Their first go is often stuffed up. Doesn't mean that they
did anything wrong, they just weren't omniscient.

Other scientists tried to replicate, failed to replicate, the
scientific method has its say.
Post by Quadibloc
(Since this particular research has nothing to do with ESP, though, I think the
reaction is unwarranted.)
Michael F. Stemper
2018-10-13 16:28:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 21:35:20 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 11:52:44 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
Post by Michael F. Stemper
After the Rhine experiments, anything that references Duke and
parapsychology in a positive light is automatically suspect in my
book. I don't care how much they impressed JWC.
What, specifically, is your objection to their research?
I thought he was very clear. He had no specific objection to the research
involving cats. But apparently the Rhine experiments on ESP with the Zener cards
were so discredited as to cast a pall over that University's reputation.
As to why J. B. Rhine's research is discredited, you can look it up on
Wikipedia.
Nothing there about "discredited". Scientists try to study new
I suggest that you go the the "Reception" section:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Banks_Rhine#Reception>
Methodological failings, such as the various ways that the subjects
could see the cards, are listed there. With source attributions.
--
Michael F. Stemper
Deuteronomy 24:17
J. Clarke
2018-10-13 19:26:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 13 Oct 2018 11:28:07 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
Post by Michael F. Stemper
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 21:35:20 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 11:52:44 -0500, "Michael F. Stemper"
Post by Michael F. Stemper
After the Rhine experiments, anything that references Duke and
parapsychology in a positive light is automatically suspect in my
book. I don't care how much they impressed JWC.
What, specifically, is your objection to their research?
I thought he was very clear. He had no specific objection to the research
involving cats. But apparently the Rhine experiments on ESP with the Zener cards
were so discredited as to cast a pall over that University's reputation.
As to why J. B. Rhine's research is discredited, you can look it up on
Wikipedia.
Nothing there about "discredited". Scientists try to study new
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Banks_Rhine#Reception>
Methodological failings, such as the various ways that the subjects
could see the cards, are listed there. With source attributions.
That there were methodological failings does not "discredit" the
researcher. It just shows that he wasn't omniscient and so missed
potential issues in his experimental design that were later identified
by other researchers.

You seem to expect the first experiment in a new science to be
conducted perfectly. It doesn't work that way.
Quadibloc
2018-10-13 23:46:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
Nothing there about "discredited".
Scientists who boldly study new fields are often, for that reason only,
disparaged, often unjustly, by their colleagues.

Wikipedia is being mild and careful, if anything. But given that most scientists
started out thinking that he was a kook and a crank to begin with, even without
hard evidence of same, once it is definitely established that every single
positive result he got was the result of sloppy statistical work... well, any
interest in pursuing ESP further on the part of the scientific community in
general can be described as now dead rather than merely moribund.

And if ESP does really exist, and there's a better way to test for it than Zener
cards, well, whichever bold scientist goes that route is now going to face an
even tougher uphill battle than Rhine initially did. So if ESP does really
exist, it will be harder for us to find out about it.

John Savard
J. Clarke
2018-10-14 00:05:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 13 Oct 2018 16:46:26 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Post by J. Clarke
Nothing there about "discredited".
Scientists who boldly study new fields are often, for that reason only,
disparaged, often unjustly, by their colleagues.
Wikipedia is being mild and careful, if anything. But given that most scientists
started out thinking that he was a kook and a crank to begin with, even without
hard evidence of same, once it is definitely established that every single
positive result he got was the result of sloppy statistical work... well, any
interest in pursuing ESP further on the part of the scientific community in
general can be described as now dead rather than merely moribund.
If there was no ESP research going on then you would have a point.
However that is not the case.
Post by Quadibloc
And if ESP does really exist, and there's a better way to test for it than Zener
cards, well, whichever bold scientist goes that route is now going to face an
even tougher uphill battle than Rhine initially did. So if ESP does really
exist, it will be harder for us to find out about it.
??? Are you saying that a scientist, like, say, Daryl Bem, who uses a
method other than Zener cards will be criticized for not using Zener
cards?
Post by Quadibloc
John Savard
Quadibloc
2018-10-14 02:10:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
On Sat, 13 Oct 2018 16:46:26 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
And if ESP does really exist, and there's a better way to test for it than Zener
cards, well, whichever bold scientist goes that route is now going to face an
even tougher uphill battle than Rhine initially did. So if ESP does really
exist, it will be harder for us to find out about it.
??? Are you saying that a scientist, like, say, Daryl Bem, who uses a
method other than Zener cards will be criticized for not using Zener
cards?
No. I'm saying that even if ESP were real, and some other scientist will have
better luck than Rhine in proving it, partly by using different methods, that
scientist will face enormous difficulties before his discoveries are crowned
with acceptance and recognition.

John Savard
Quadibloc
2018-10-14 02:17:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by J. Clarke
If there was no ESP research going on then you would have a point.
However that is not the case.
Good heavens, you're right:

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2008/01/neuroimaging-fails-to-demonstrate-esp-is-real/

https://slate.com/health-and-science/2017/06/daryl-bem-proved-esp-is-real-showed-science-is-broken.html

The second one described research the professor paid for out of his own pocket
unofficially, at least at first.

And yet I was just reading - oh, yes, in a recent issue of _Scientific American_
- about how science funding was broken, because only safe projects by
established researchers promising quick results are getting funding. Apparently
that situation isn't hopelessly bad just yet, then.

John Savard

Loading...