RetroPsychoKinesis Experiments Online

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

RetroPsychoKinesis Experiments Online

Postby Rigorous Intuition » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:27 am

<!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/experiments/contents.html">Table of Contents</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/experiments/">Experiments Online</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> (<!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>Bell Curve, Clock Face, Pendulum</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->)<br><br><br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.fourmilab.ch/rpkp/proposal.html">What's all this about?</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>0. Something to think about...</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>A complete stranger hands you a sealed envelope and asks you to choose an number between one and fifty. A bit puzzled, perhaps, you think for a moment and announce "twenty-eight". The stranger scribbles this in a notebook, tells you to open the envelope in two weeks, smiles, and disappears.<br><br>Two weeks later you open the envelope to find a piece of paper with "28" printed neatly in the centre. Your mind swims with possible explanations, including the possibility that it was merely a coincidence. But a few days later, the stranger reappears with another envelope, you choose another number, and the sequence of events repeats. How many times would this have to occur before you accepted that something VERY STRANGE INDEED was going on?<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>1. Basic Idea</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>The idea of the Project is to make use of recently established global computer networking facilities in order to explore the purported anomalous effect known as retropsychokinesis (from now on we shall refer to this as "RPK"). The existence of such an effect has such profound philosophical implications that, despite repeated and well-regulated demonstrations carried out for over 20 years, it has remained an obscure matter of parapsychological controversy. However, the emergence of the WWW has created an exciting new possibility.<br><br>Although attempts to create "online" interactive parapsychological experiments have already appeared on the WWW, these are in early stages of development and published results have not been extensive. These experiments are increasing awareness of the claims and methods of parapsychology research. But the collection of data for serious research purposes is obviously restricted, as subjects cannot be supervised, and the lack of control in the experiments jeopardises the credibility of any results obtained.<br><br>However, the "retrocausal" or reverse-time nature of RPK is such that problems of this nature can generally be overcome. The proposed experiment(s) would, in fact, bypass most of the usual obstacles which occur in parapsychological research. These include attracting and motivating appropriate subjects, the limitations on the number of subjects which can be tested in any reasonable length of time, the elimination of all possible fraud, and the difficulties subjects face in performing in unfamiliar laboratory settings or in the presence of sceptical observers. The difficulties in publicising and gaining acceptance for the results obtained has perhaps been the most significant obstacle. Experiments which yield significant results have generally been accepted by the "believers" and rejected by the sceptics as insufficiently well-regulated (a claim which is often justified, but which can never be overcome in the existing research format). However, this too could change, as we shall see.<br><br><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>2. A Brief History of Retropsychokinesis Research</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>The more generally-defined effect known as psychokinesis (PK) has been studied extensively since the 1930's when J.B. Rhine (Duke University) began systematically testing claims that seemingly random events such as dice and coin throws are subject to subtle psychic influences. His succesor, Helmut Schmidt, increased the rigour and efficiency of these experiments by introducing an electronic random number generator which used subatomic decay processes in order to generate data of the most fundamentally "random" nature. One must keep in mind that the issue of randomness is a difficult one - the interpretation of probabilities, the seeming effectiveness of statistical methods, and the fundamental role which probabilities play in quantum mechanical models of objective reality are all problems closely related to this work. Schmidt went on to run experiments similar to the original ones (PK effects on electronically generated random data), the only diference being that the data was prerecorded (and, importantly, unobserved), rather than generated in "real time" as the experiments were carred out. Despite being extraordinarily counterintuitive, the results suggested strongly that unobserved random events which occured in the past are subject to psychokinetic influence - in other words, the human mind can in some (limited) sense "influence" or at least "select" the past.<br><br>Schmidt and others have spent many years repeating the experiments, refining the techniques, and gathering valuable data, despite the general lack of public awareness and academic acceptance which they have received. Various acausal models of reality, and appropriate modifications of quantum theory have been suggested in order to account for the phenomenon, yet many fundamental questions regarding the nature of time, consciousness and causality remain largely unanswered.<br><br>The Project has been in communication with Schmidt (now retired, but still active) for the past few months, and we have received letters and e-mail in which he describes the proposed experiment as "very reasonable and exciting". Although he admits to being only vaguely familiar with the more sophisticated applications of the Internet, he can be contacted via e-mail. He has provided the Project with a random number generator and continues to offer useful advice as it is needed. <br><br> <p></p><i></i>
Rigorous Intuition
 
Posts: 1744
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:36 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: RetroPsychoKinesis Experiments Online

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:55 am

I was involved with some online telepathy type experiments a few years ago.<br><br>The results were good, but by about the third or forth try some really strange shit started to happen.<br><br>I don't want to post details without contacting the other party first. I have done that before on occasion out of excitement and am trying to moderate that sort of indiscretion.<!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :o --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/embarassed.gif ALT=":o"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br><br>I will say that at some point "other" things from outside our communications line interacted with us, in some v odd ways.<br><br>Not necessarily from "outside" in a Lovecraftian sense. But from outside the communication channel we had established. Like you think you are talking on a closed phone line, but it may be more of a CB radio. <p></p><i></i>
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10599
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: RetroPsychoKinesis Experiments Online

Postby yesferatu » Mon Jul 17, 2006 3:29 am

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Your mind swims with possible explanations, including the possibility that it was merely a coincidence. But a few days later, the stranger reappears with another envelope, you choose another number, and the sequence of events repeats. How many times would this have to occur before you accepted that something VERY STRANGE INDEED was going on?<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Is this possibly (and don't laugh , because to me it was very weird) what I experienced once with a Kris Angel TV show? Or did I just not catch the subliminal suggestions - let me explain: It was one of those things where he tells people watching on TV to pick a card in their minds while he is holding a deck. (This was an older show before he got his regular gig on A&E.) I am quite aware of subliminal devices and tried to be aware enough to catch any. And maybe that is the whole point of subliminal, is that you <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>can't</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> consciously catch them. Yet I settled on a card, I believe queen of clubs, in my mind, and since this is a TV audience, I am not expecting him to pull that card, but he does. I am more than a little surprised, and he says "think it was coincidence? Let's do it again." So I strain for subliminals at this point and also settle on a card, I think nine of diamonds. Quite sure he won't pull nine of diamonds, since this is a TV audience after all...and he pulls a nine of diamonds. <br>I think I lean toward some mental suggestion on the screen I could not pick up, yet it made me curious in exploring the kinds of RPK experiments mentioned, whether what occured with Kris Angel's show was RPK or a simple card trick. <br><br>Laugh at how gullible and easily tricked I can be, but it was weird. If I had a tape, perhaps I could slow mo it for subliminals and catch something to explain it.<br>It was either a simple card trick, RPK, or coincidence.<br><br>Maybe someone knows how Angel pulled that off. I would like to know how, cause it was really interesting. Some of his levitations are pretty wild as well. <p></p><i></i>
yesferatu
 

speaking of Criss Angel,

Postby Rigorous Intuition » Mon Jul 17, 2006 3:48 am

can anyone explain how he appears to <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://youtube.com/watch?v=iRdv_VNPe7g&search=Criss%20Angel">saw himself in half</a><!--EZCODE LINK END-->? [warning, fairly intense illusion ahead] <p></p><i></i>
Rigorous Intuition
 
Posts: 1744
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 3:36 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: speaking of Criss Angel,

Postby Dreams End » Mon Jul 17, 2006 4:30 am

Hey folks. Last time I tried that retropk site it looked like they had not actively been tracking it for years. Still works though.<br><br>As for magic and Kriss Angel...that's a synchonicity as I just discovered him. I saw low quality vids on youtube but I'll mention a couple things.<br><br>The guessing your card bit is a nice one. The cards are rigged in some way so that the Queen of hearts (an easy to spot card) shows up much longer than the other cards. Most but not all will pick up on it. David Blaine did the same trick and I'm sure others have. You can find it on youtube...watch how long, relatively speaking, the Queen of Hearts is in your view. Either he pauses or there's more than one in a row...I couldn't tell which but it's clear. A great lesson for everyone about suggestibility and standards of evidence.<br><br>My impression of angel is that he cheats. That is, he violates some expected rules when broadcasting magic on tv. <br><br>The sawed in half was an example. Most illusions such as that are done in exactly the only way that they could possibly be done. In that case, two people, not one...one on each half. The illusions are built so it looks like there's no room for the second person or the first person's feet. I'm not completely sure how this one worked because of the cheating. that is<br><br>1. The camera did not go look at the bottom half as well. I couldn't get a look at it... and <br>2. He had confederates on stage with him as he was getting on the platform. In fact, if you notice he usually has a small group around him for these tricks. Almost all of them are confederates from what I can see as the various switches needed are too much out in the open.<br><br>To me it violates the expected rule of the camera seeing what the audience sees and the idea that, sure, you can have a patsy or two but the whole crowd shouldn't be in on it. <br><br>However, he's got some great illusions. Go to youtube and search on his name. How about literally pulling a woman in half. Lay her on a bench as volunteers pull the hands and feet and her top half comes off and runs off on its own. (This is actually a VERY old illusion and David Blaine wrote about it in his book.)<br><br>The walking on water looks great, but if I"m right about how he does it, then the folks in the pool ALL have to be in on it (unless he's supported from above and very good at pantomime.) That's "cheating" to me...might as well just use special effects.<br><br>He has a nice tribute to Doug Henning (he's the first I saw do that trick anyway) by making an elephant disappear...and probably done the same way, which does mean several in the circle around the elephant are in on the trick. I guess that's not really "cheating" like the pool illusion.<br><br>He does some nice levitations on the streets of New York.<br><br>He also does a teleportation bit where he's covered by a barrel with people all around and three seconds later they lift it and he's way up on a roof. Again, much of the crowd is in on that illusion so it just bothered me. <br><br>His walking through glass bit was fun....actually one of the simpler illusions and I'll cut him some slack for his one helper.<br><br>I plan to watch his show this week if it's on. I've never seen it. But I do think he "cheats" by having too much of the "street magic" staged.<br><br>Sorry to go off on that tangent but I had been wanting to get other people's impressions. I think Prof. Pan is a pro stage magician so I'd be curious about his take. There's just supposed to be this understanding with the audience that the trick won't depend on camera angles or that the angles represent what most of the audience is seeing. <br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=dreamsend@rigorousintuition>Dreams End</A> at: 7/17/06 2:34 am<br></i>
Dreams End
 

Re: speaking of Criss Angel,

Postby NewKid » Mon Jul 17, 2006 4:30 am

It's hard to tell with the all the hysteria going on and the camera moving around so much. What little I've seen of him suggests that he uses every trick in the book -- fake witnesses, subliminal messages, smoke and mirrors, camera tricks, etc. <br><br>Here's one where it looks like one of his actresses kinda screwed it up. <br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://youtube.com/watch?v=qPF9-A2v9E0&search=%22criss%20angel%22%20%22deja%20vu%22" target="top">youtube.com/watch?v=qPF9-A2v9E0&search=%22criss%20angel%22%20%22deja%20vu%22</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br> <p></p><i></i>
NewKid
 
Posts: 1036
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2005 1:57 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: speaking of Criss Angel,

Postby Et in Arcadia ego » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:12 am

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>can anyone explain how he appears to saw himself in half? [warning, fairly intense illusion ahead]<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Can't explain iut, no, but the fact that you never once see the camera point towards where his insides should be on either end says alot.<br><br>He sucks. He always has some hot chicks around..<br><br><!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :D --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/happy.gif ALT=":D"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <p>____________________<br>Oderint, dum metuant</p><i></i>
User avatar
Et in Arcadia ego
 
Posts: 4104
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2005 5:06 pm
Location: The Void
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: RetroPsychoKinesis Experiments Online

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Mon Jul 17, 2006 10:00 am

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I am quite aware of subliminal devices and tried to be aware enough to catch any. And maybe that is the whole point of subliminal, is that you can't consciously catch them.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Years ago I was watching some TV at a friends. The show was crap, but one character was wearing a broach that wasn't, but from a distance appeared to be a mcdonalds large fries.<br><br>I didn't notice till after 2 people got hungry and went to get what turned out to be chips. They were on foot and the nearest maccas was miles away.<br><br>The brooch wasn't a macdonalds chips tho, it was some bizzare flower vase thing that looked like it at a distance. <p></p><i></i>
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10599
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: speaking of Criss Angel,

Postby yesferatu » Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:16 am

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The guessing your card bit is a nice one. The cards are rigged in some way so that the Queen of hearts (an easy to spot card) shows up much longer than the other cards. Most but not all will pick up on it.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>He did not show any of the cards...just a held a deck facing him, and just asked to think of a card. I think it was a live show. <br><br><br><br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>
yesferatu
 

pick a card

Postby Mentalgongfu » Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:27 am

A "mentalist" performed a similar trick on me a few years ago. He had me pick an invisible card from an invisible deck, decide what it was, show it to my friend (ha), then put it back into the invisble deck. <br><br>Then he pulled out a real deck of cards and showed me the card I had picked in my mind. As I recall, he asked a question or two to lead to the answer, such as whether the suit was red or black, but I was astounded when he very quickly pulled out the card I had picked. <br><br>I'm sure there was a trick involved, but I couldn't quite figure out what it was. <p></p><i></i>
Mentalgongfu
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 9:47 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: pick a card

Postby Dreams End » Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:41 am

yesferatu...oh..that's not the trick I saw. In that one, he quickly riffled through the whole deck so you got just the barest glimpse of each card and the red queen got extra time.<br><br>To pick a card once you have some answers is probably not that tough. I don't know the specifics. To say "pick a card in your mind" and then to name it is a bit tougher for a nationwide audience so I'm not sure I get what that trick was.<br><br>Blaine claimed that certain cards are picked more often and if you prime the person with "pick a really 'hard' card" there'd be patterns to what they'd pick. I saw Blaine do a blind guess as you describe to a passerby on one of his tv shows. He's admitted though that he does those a lot and simply doesn't show the ones that don't work. A good magician would say "is that your card" and if someone says no he'd have a backup trick to transition away from that one.<br><br>There's other ways too. Here I'll do one for everyone. (it's silly but Blaine did it on TV.)<br><br>Pick a number between 50 and one hundred but make sure that it's an even number and the first digit is smaller than the second.<br><br>Got it?<br><br><br>?<br>?<br>?<br>?<br>?<br>?<br>?<br>?<br>??<br>?<br>?<br>?<br>??<br>?<br><br><br>68, eh????<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

Re: pick a card

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:49 am

nah 47 <p></p><i></i>
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10599
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: pick a card

Postby Dreams End » Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:52 am

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Pick a number between 50 and one hundred but make sure that it's an even number and the first digit is smaller than the second.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>It only works if people follow directions <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :( --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":("><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br><br>By the way, when it's done with Blaine's usual patter and fasttalk, it is more impressive. <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

Re: pick a card

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Tue Jul 18, 2006 1:20 am

<!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :o --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/embarassed.gif ALT=":o"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :o --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/embarassed.gif ALT=":o"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :o --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/embarassed.gif ALT=":o"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br><br>Yeah I just read pick a number...<br><br>56, 57, 58, 59, 67, 68, 69, 78, 79, 89.<br><br>So only 10 number out of 50 so far.<br><br>56, 58, 68, 78,<br><br>Now 4 out of 50.<br><br>And you have 8 question marks, then 6 with 2 having 2 question marks.<br><br>It seemed as if the ?'s you posted had an 8 then a 6 with the ?'s in the final 6 as some sort of even number trigger.<br><br>Was that bit with the ?'s designed to implant numbers in the mind or relationships, like even, 2 apart, must be 68.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>It only works if people follow directions <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Directions are for people who can follow.<br><br>Er I mean for people who can't figure things out for themselves, I mean that was a bit dumb wasn't it.<br><br>(Slaps head 3 or 4 times) Doh. <p></p><i></i>
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10599
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: pick a card

Postby Dreams End » Tue Jul 18, 2006 2:29 am

68 is the only number that works for those who found all that confusing. <p></p><i></i>
Dreams End
 

Next

Return to UFOs and High Weirdness

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests