Quote:
Originally Posted by .NetRolller 3D 
Correct decoding of the word is a direct proof of ESP, as the Shannon theorem doesn't apply if no channel exists, which is precisely what skeptics claim.
|
I don't know which skeptics in particular you are referring to but often the skeptics don't say there is no channel, they say the channel is not psi.
The difference between your experiment and a typical zener card experiment is that typically the cards are in random order but in your experiment they are ordered. All the coding and decoding is simply a way of eliminating the possibility that the results are due to the precipient being able to guess the right card due to various types of randomization problems.
A simpler method would be to use a large number of cards properly randomized.
In that case, I don't see how it is theoretically possible to get a negative result after decoding in your experiment and a positive result using a large number of randomized zener cards. If you get a positive result with a statistically significant effect with randomized cards then there will be enough signal to distinguish from noise in your experiment. That's the basis for thinking a positive result might be possible in your experiment.
The same factor, redundancy (a large number of cards), that gives a statistically significant but small effect size in a typical experiment will, in your experiment, allow the correct signal to be extracted from the noise using an error correcting code.
Eventhough I don't agree there is a sound theoretical basis for doing the experiment, I do think it would be interesting to do it - sometimes that's how you learn a theory is wrong.
But, if you do get a positive result in your experiment you will still be open to the same types of criticisms that are tossed around by skeptics who haven't investigated the experimental protocols: cheating, sensory leakage, and the elusive "something else which must exist but I don't know what it is".