Consciousness and the double-slit interference pattern: Six experiments

[EthanT]

This was the only semi-constructive reply at physicsforums.com:

I say this as someone who's forte is cognitive neuroscience, not physics.

I'm extremely skeptical; I can think of no possible mechanism by which this effect could have occurred. If we assume for a moment that the direction of attention could collapse a wave function, then this would not be the proper way to design an experiment to test it. When attention tasks like the one here are performed in functional neuroimaging experiments, you have to go to great lengths to design control tasks for the simple reason people can't actually "withdraw" their attention on command ("stop thinking of the purple elephant"). If you wanted to do this experiment properly (and there a few ways you could do it), you could, say, have two slit apparatuses on opposite sides of the rooms and have participants switch their focus between them. Another way would be to have the slit apparatus and an entirely different by equally exotic looking machine between which the participants could switch their attention. "Slit" and "nothing" is poor design.

Even if the experiment were designed properly, I'd apply Bayes' theorem and conclude that the prior probability of the effect being real was too remote to conclude anything.

[Arouet]

Originally Posted by EthanT

There was a thread over at physicsforums.com asking about this experiment. After only three posts, the entire thread was deleted by the forum moderators.

I think that pretty much sums up the respect the mainstream has for this topic and the journal physics essays, lol

Don't know why it should have been deleted! I would have liked to hear their input on this

[EthanT]

Originally Posted by Arouet

Don't know why it should have been deleted! I would have liked to hear their input on this

Me too, but they have zero-tolerance for "fringe" stuff like this.

It really is representative of what you're up against as a psi researcher in the real world.

[really]

Originally Posted by EthanT

This was the only semi-constructive reply at physicsforums.com:

Originally Posted by Arouet

Don't know why it should have been deleted! I would have liked to hear their input on this

Originally Posted by EthanT

Me too, but they have zero-tolerance for "fringe" stuff like this.

It really is representative of what you're up against as a psi researcher in the real world.

Even if the experiment were designed properly, I'd apply Bayes' theorem and conclude that the prior probability of the effect being real was too remote to conclude anything.

Note, even Maaneli has stated this. It's their forum with their rules. I would be helpful if they would explain what are the strengths and weaknesses of this experiment.

Ethan I assume you thought of this. If humans can, through sheer force of will, change reality which is at the heart of this type of experiment's premise, how insane this universe would be ?

[Sandy B]

Originally Posted by Miguel

Unusual outcome measures are a serious red flag that may indicate inappropriate use of statistics. It doesn't matter if the measure is justifiable. The mere fact that there are several measures to chose from is enough.

Isn't this just a fancy way of saying "I don't like the data, so there must be a flaw even if I can't find it!"?

[davidsmith73]

Originally Posted by really

It's their forum with their rules.

You don't think the thread was deleted because they didn't like the very idea behind the experiment? Oooh no, that will open the flood gates of woo...

[Sandy B]

Originally Posted by Maaneli

Well, it would imply that PK is a quantum mechanical thing (because it can alter quantum mechanical probabilities). So I think in order to really test whether psi has any quantum characteristics, Radin et al.'s experiment needs to go to single photons (which they're actually in the process of doing).

Thanks so much for all the great posts on this! It makes the material much more interesting.

I would think that psi likely does have quantum charicteristics. Some of the very frustrating behavior of pk follows patterns predicted along these lines. (or so I've been told by a physicist I talk to on skype.)

[Arouet]

Originally Posted by Sandy B

Thanks so much for all the great posts on this! It makes the material much more interesting.

I would think that psi likely does have quantum charicteristics. Some of the very frustrating behavior of pk follows patterns predicted along these lines. (or so I've been told by a physicist I talk to on skype.)

And that is a perfectly valid hypothesis to puirsue - if psi could be described using QM that would make it pretty easy to accept!

[Sandy B]

Originally Posted by Arouet

And that is a perfectly valid hypothesis to puirsue - if psi could be described using QM that would make it pretty easy to accept!

You would think that, but it isn't easy to accept such things. There will always be someone saying the data must be wrong because he doesn't agree with it.

The inconsistency seen in psi/pk effects was predicted in Walter von Lucadou's Theory of Pragmatic Behavior, based on quantum theory.

------------------------------------------------------
Lucadou, W.v. (1995a). The Model of Pragmatic Information (MPI). European Journal of Parapsychology 11, 58-75

[Miguel]

Originally Posted by Sandy B

Isn't this just a fancy way of saying "I don't like the data, so there must be a flaw even if I can't find it!"?

No, it's a statistics thing.